|
Meeting at Klaipeda University, Lithuania June 5-9, 1995
Convener: Dr. Sergej Olenin (Lithuania)
Chairman: Prof. Dr. Erkki Leppäkoski (Finland)
Secretary and rapporteur: Kristina Jansson (Sweden) and Stephan Gollasch (Germany)
General information
The BMB WG 30 was established by the BMB Committee at its annual meeting in Mariehamn, Åland Islands, Finland at 18-20 October, 1994. An initial meeting of the Working Group was held at the Faculty for Nature Sciences, Klaipeda University (Klaipeda, Lithuania) at June 5-9. The meeting was attended by 22 marine and freshwater biologists from Estonia, Germany, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia and Sweden; also specialists in Information Technology and Computer Sciences of Klaipeda University oined the WG 30 meeting. Materials of the meeting include: a
report, format and technical notes on an encyclopaedia on the Baltic NEMOs recommendations to HELCOM, agenda, list of participants/WG members. Other relevant documents (list of the introduced species extracted from a Swedish report (Jansson 1994) ; ICES Code of Practice; ICES WGITMO National Report format; and IMO Voluntary Guidelines) are also enclosed.
1. Exchange of Information on Introduced Species.
Standardisation of entries into a Multimedia Encyclopaedia on
the Baltic Sea Region NEMO's.
A Multimedia (Computerised) Encyclopaedia on the Baltic Sea Region
NEMOs is to be one of the end products of the WG 30. It should
include the follow up of introduced species, including bacteria,
protozoans, fungi, parasites and disease agents.
Entries to the Encyclopaedia should be mailed to the Centre for
Information Technologies and Environmental Studies in Klaipeda.
A printout of the Encyclopaedia will be sent to the WG Members for
corrections and additions before the CD-ROM is produced.
Inventory of existing databases.
The Members of the WG 30 are encouraged to make an inventory of
existing databases in their home countries. Information from these
databases about introduced species should be extracted and sent to
Klaipeda, using the standardised format.
The database should be completed by information of the ICES WGITMO
national reports. It is suggested that members of the WG 30 could
serve as "corresponding members" to the ICES WGITMO to achieve a
better geographic coverage for these reports.
Exchange of ballast water experiences.
To facilitate the start of ballast studies in other Baltic countries,
the German project (contact person Stephan Gollasch) is willing to
assist with information on sampling methods etc. This could also
enable comparisons of results between different investigations.
2. List of Potential Invaders.
Shipping statistics.
Major shipping routes have to be identified, and preferably the
volumes of discharged ballast water should also be listed for
different areas of origin. These data are also asked for by the IMO.
Since introductions from the Black Sea and Caspian Sea area are of
special concern, it is important to get an estimate of the number
of ships involved in river-going traffic. Data are completely
lacking, but may be available through the customs offices and/or
Department of Transportation of the respective countries.
Risk assessment.
- Hot spot areas.
Parallel to this work the WG should try to identify world-wide hot
spot areas for possible new introductions to the Baltic Sea: areas
that probably have comparable abiotic conditions (e.g. the Black
Sea, Great Lakes and estuaries such as Chesapeake Bay). In addition
to this the WG should try to locate critical areas in the Baltic
Sea that may be sensitive to introductions.
- Hot spot organisms/"black list".
The WG 30 should investigate hot spot organisms already known to
be invasive and/or harmful in other areas that are comparable to
the Baltic Sea with respect to salinity etc. (organisms such as
Mnemiopsis leidyi). Criteria are needed for classification of
potential invaders into the following groups, like:
- black (high risk species): e.g. hosts of parasites of man and
wildlife, toxin producing organisms;
- grey (medium risk species): e.g. fouling on ships etc;
- white/beneficial (low risk species): e.g. no spread beyond the
point of introduction, no observed or predicted impacts on the
ecosystem.
For evaluating the potential of an organism to become an invader
firstly abiotic criteria and secondly biotic criteria (such as being
an opportunistic/generalist species etc.) could be used (compare
the SCOPE Programme "The ecology of biological invasions").
A list of hot spot organisms could be forwarded to scientists as
well as to international/national agencies responsible for environmental
protection, including monitoring and aquaculture. It should also be
forwarded to organizations such as HELCOM.
Risk assessments should also be carried out at the ecosystem level
to be able to evaluate whether stricter rules are required for the
Baltic Sea concerning e.g. ballast water management.
The Baltic Sea as a donor area for introductions
The BMB WG 30 recognises that the Baltic Sea might be a donor area
for introductions into other parts of the world. The WG should try
to identify species that might cause harm if transported elsewhere
and forward this information to e.g. IMO and ICES.
3. Monitoring Programme.
Areas that are the most likely to receive introductions, such as
harbours, are generally not part of the national monitoring programmes.
Studies of harbour areas therefore have to be carried out.
Close contact should be maintained between taxonomic expertise and
those performing the monitoring programmes. Monitoring programmes
should include instructions on how to report such records to HELCOM
and the national authorities. They should also be encouraged to
supply records of new species to the BMB WG 30 and to ICES WGITMO.
Since most introduced species have been recorded in shallow waters it
is especially important that these areas are included in the
intercalibration exercises carried out by HELCOM, and that shallow
water stations should also be a part of the Baltic Monitoring
Programme. Observations and effects of introductions should be
incorporated into the HELCOM Periodic Assessments (made every five
years) as well as reported annually to HELCOM Environmental Data
Bank.
Reports of monitoring data may sometimes include introduced species,
which have not yet been recognised (e.g. Corophium multisetosum and
C. lacustre have been determined as C. volutator when only
the latter species was known to be present in the area). Therefore,
all data have to be controlled/checked for possible mistakes in taxonomic
identification.
4. Risk of Introducing Parasites and Disease Agents.
The BMB WG 30 should co-operate with the BMB WG on Parasites and
Disease Agents and the responsible ICES WG. The BMB WG 30 should
especially focus on introductions which are completing the life
cycles (as hosts) of formerly introduced parasites. The veterinary
authorities should also be made aware of this problem.
5. Recommendations from the BMB WG 30.
The WG agreed upon a statement being sent to HELCOM and IMO (see
Appendix 2). Copies for information will be sent to BMB, ICES and
the non-governmental organisations WWF, Coalition Clean Baltic (CCB),
International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the
national representatives within the relevant committees/WGs of
HELCOM and IMO.
6. Education and training.
Marine biology/taxonomy.
BMB WG 30 should try to organise PhD courses relevant to introduced
species combined with taxonomic identification. Prof. Erkki Leppäkoski
agreed to send an application to NorFA before June 1, 1996. He is
also compiling a list of ongoing PhD and M Sc projects concerning
introduced species (deadline middle of August 1995).
The members of the WG are asked to encourage colleagues who teach
under-graduate level courses to incorporate the subject of introductions
into the curriculum. As an example, the WG could provide a list of
some relevant papers for teachers.
Authorities responsible for maritime activities.
Information about the potential problems in connection with
introductions should be part of the curriculum at maritime colleges,
with emphasis on the ballast water issue and the IMO Voluntary
Guidelines (see Appendix 6). The WG should bring this issue to their
attention. Members of the WG may volunteer as lecturers, or video
presentations (such as that by the U S Coast Guard) may be made
available.
The WG member should encourage/assist in training of persons belonging
to authorities/agencies (e.g. Coast Guard, harbour, customs and
local/regional authorities responsible for environmental protection
and permission of aquaculture).
7. Laws on Reducing Risks of Introductions.
In order to prevent new introductions, rather than combat existing
ones, methods for reducing the risk of introduction should be
applied. This may include laws and regulations, technical and
operational solutions. For intentional introductions the ICES
"Code of Practice on the introductions and transfers of marine
organisms" (see Appendix 4) should be applied. For preventing
unintentional introductions by ballast water and/or sediment
discharges the IMO Voluntary Guidelines for ballast water management
should be followed.
The BMB WG 30 members should try to collect and spread information
about laws and regulations applicable in their respective countries
for animals, plants and genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This
may be achieved through encouraging students in environmental law
to incorporate this in their projects. International conventions
applicable to the Baltic Sea region should also be identified by
the WG.
8. Information to General Public.
The BMB WG members are encouraged to spread information to the
general public by:
a) posters and information sheets at public aquaria, museums etc.,
including also information material for school classes;
b) through popular scientific articles in newspapers (without not
exaggerating the risks);
c) coast watch programmes (incl. search for "easily recognised
introduced species" like Sargassum muticum, Dreissena polymorpha,
Ondatra zibethica and barnacles);
d) signs/posters of the type "you can help to prevent introducing/
distributing new species" at marinas etc., by checking organisms on
boats, not using live baits from other areas etc.;
e) the WG 30 may create another poster in order to inform about the
possible consequences of introductions as a scenario/model (like for
zebra mussels introduced into the Great Lakes).
9. Terms of Reference.
A joint meeting of the BMB WG 30 and the ICES WGITMO is planned
preliminary for April 22.-26. 1996 at the Sea Fisheries Institute
in Gdynia Poland.
The WG 30 decided to make their final report to the BMB Symposium to be held in 1999.
|
