To contribute to the discussion about the aquatic invasive species section of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, post your thoughts below. If you want the U.S. and Canadian governments to consider your input, send it to the official website.
The continued introduction of invasive species is one of the most significant threats to biodiversity. Currently there is no binational mechanism to deal with this threat comprehensively. The review of the GLWQA indicated that because aquatic invasive species (AIS) can have known impacts on both water quality and beneficial uses, the issue falls within the scope of the Agreement. In addition, managing the impacts of harmful invasive species, once established, is a major challenge and the economic impacts are significant.
1. Scope
The recent review of the GLWQA noted the significant environmental and economic damages caused by AIS. AIS can degrade water quality by increasing turbidity, concentrating toxins, and altering nutrient/energy flows within the food web. AIS may be extremely difficult to control or impossible to eliminate once established. They are one of the leading causes of impairments of biological integrity in the Great Lakes.
The following are some considerations for the amendments to the GLWQA related to the scope of AIS efforts under a new Agreement:
* Address invasive species known to impact water quality.
* Address all aquatic invasive species that impact the biological integrity of the lakes.
* Address all aquatic and terrestrial invasive species within the Great Lakes basin.
* Also consider invasive species that are a threat to enter the Great Lakes through canals, rivers, and waterways.
2. Actions
The only mentions of AIS in the current agreement can be found in Annex 6, 1 (b) and Annex 17, 2 (i). Both references refer only in general terms to the need for research to determine the threat of AIS in ballast water to the Great lakes ecosystem and the impacts of AIS on fish and wildlife populations and habitat. There is no discussion of prevention or control in either annex and no discussion of pathways other than ballast water. The review of the GLWQA did not make suggestions regarding the specifics of implementing binational actions within a revised agreement.
Prevention is the primary focus of AIS efforts. To be effective, threats need to be identified at an early stage when prevention and control actions are still possible. A science-based risk assessment of the species and pathways provides an early warning of potential threats to the Great Lakes and helps guide management actions that will prevent AIS introductions. Rapid response actions could eliminate small infestations before they become established. Additional actions can help reduce the impacts of species that are already established in the Great Lakes.
The following elements of a program to address AIS focused on prevention are under consideration.
Prevention
* Risk assessments of species and pathways to identify potential threats of introduction and impacts;
* Risk management actions to prevent potential threats of introduction and impact
* Outreach and communication
Rapid Response
* Early detection/monitoring surveillance to detect species before they become widely established;
* Rapid response/control activities to eliminate and/or stop the spread of new invaders;
Management
* Ongoing control/management to address species already present
* Research to find ways to further minimize impacts of species already present
3. Management Framework
The need for a binational governance model to deal specifically with an AIS binational action plan under a revised GLWQA is being considered. The GLWQA review suggested that a revised GLWQA could serve as the organizing vehicle to deal with AIS binationally. The GLWQA review did not deal specifically with a management framework other than suggesting the creation of a separate annex for AIS but did suggest the U.S. Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy and its Aquatic Invasive Species appendix should be taken into account. There could also be existing action plans in either or both countries that could serve as models for an AIS annex in a revised Agreement.
The following are some considerations for the amendments to the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement related to managing AIS under a new Agreement.
* Both countries identify priorities for action through a binational forum and address the priorities separately through existing or new domestic action.
* Canada and the U.S. develop priorities and strategies for addressing AIS through a binational action plan and address the priorities separately through existing or new domestic action.
* In addition to either of the above, Canada and the U.S. implement new binational programs or activities where feasible, in addition to existing domestic ones, to address elements of an AIS program.