**Western Regional Panel**

**Annual Meeting**

**Sheraton Hotel**

**Anchorage, Alaska**

**September 8-9, 2004**

# **Wednesday, September 8, 2004**

## Welcome, Vision, Introductions

Susan Ellis welcomed everyone to the meeting. Marilyn Leland of host
Prince William Sound Regional Citizens' Advisory Council (PWSRCAC)
introduced John Devens, Executive Director. Devens welcomed the WRP to
Anchorage and spoke of PWSRCAC's efforts watching for invasive species
in Alaska waters and specifically those brought to Prince William Sound
and the Gulf of Alaska through tanker ballast water. Alaska State
Senator Fred Dyson also gave welcoming remarks, as did Laverne Smith,
Assistant Regional Director for Fisheries for Region 7 of the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service.

Alaska Perspectives -- Welcome and Importance of Natural Resources to
Indigenous Peoples

Ole Lake spoke of the personal importance of natural resources from the
Native perspective. He urged a kindness and compassion towards all
things, plant, fish and mammal. He spoke of the importance of not
disturbing the ecological balance by taking judiciously from the natural
resources and only what is needed. He said it was important to be
observant of changes in the environment because all environments are
connected and changes affect future generations.

## [Plenary Session]{.underline}

## ANS in Alaska -- 

## (Denny Lassuy, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bob Piorkowski, of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) )

## 

## Lassuy observed that the huge size of Alaska presents huge challenges. 

Aquatic invasive threats to Alaska include: mitten crab, green crab (not
yet in Alaska waters) but of concern because they are particularly
vulnerable in the short transit time of ballast water; Eurasian
watermilfoil, New Zealand mud snails (not in Alaska yet) but of concern;
Northern Pike -- native North of Alaska Range, not native in southern
waters; Atlantic salmon.

\[See slides\]

Green crab: Some sampling has been done in Southeast Alaska.

Northern Pike: Very efficient predators -- (agenda item later)

Eurasian watermilfoil (plant) -- present in Lake Hood, Anchorage -- a
float plane port with traffic that goes all over the world \--
non-native species could be brought in through this mechanism.

Atlantic Salmon: Alaska revolves around salmon and anything that is a
potential threat to its native wild salmon is of concern. Some escapes
have occurred from fish farms in Washington and British Columbia. A risk
assessment study is underway to study the potential for invasion of
Atlantic salmon from escaped stocks.

New Zealand mudsnails: Not yet seen in Alaska.

Crayfish showed up in 2004 in the Kenai River system. Alaska Dept. of
Fish and Game found the individual who put the crayfish into the system.
The department responded to the threat immediately. It is not yet known
if this threat of invasion is over.

Terrestrial weeds: Orange hawkweed has begun to take over in the Kodiak
National Wildlife Refuge. Lassuy said he worked with the refuge for the
eradication of this weed.

Rats: Norway Rat -- most were introduced via ship wrecks and have
invaded parts of Alaska in the Aleutian Chain. Rats have killed many
more Alaska seabirds than the entire Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. They eat
eggs, chicks and adult birds. They are starting to do eradication on
some of the islands infested.

Bob Piorkowski gave a recent history and future plans at ADF&G invasive
species program along with future planned actions. In addition, he
described a successful eradication of an invasive species, yellow perch,
in the Kenai area of\
Alaska.

The State of Alaska has been a member of the Western Regional Panel
since 1998 though involvement has been limited due to lack of funds. An
ANS Management Plan was developed and approved in 2002 with a program
coordinator hired June 2003. Federal funding for initial program
implementation has been secured. In addition to an intended strong
education focus for the program, there will be regional coordination
with local, state, and federal agencies. The Alaska Aquatic Nuisance
Species Management Plan is the first step in an integrated NIS program
in the state.

Immediate plans include: hiring an assistant coordinator with both
program planning and a ballast water focus in Fall 2004, activating an
ADF&G interdivisional team, and working toward developing a statewide
ANS council.

\[See slides\]

Alaska Yellow Perch invasion -- a success story. Yellow perch are not
indigenous in Alaska though they can thrive and reproduce under the
State's climatic conditions. A successful invasion by yellow perch is
feared as it could do great harm to existing social and economic
institutions which depend on healthy salmonid populations. Yellow perch
would feed heavily on soft bodied salmon and have high reproduction
rats. In April 2000, ADF&G received a report of yellow perch in a
Kenai-area lake from a retired conservation officer. ADF&G decided to
eradicate that invasion. Rotenone was determined to be the method of
choice but it required a lengthy approval process through several state
agencies and the Board of Fisheries along with training for ADF&G
personnel in its application. Rotenone is a restricted pesticide in
Alaska so those who apply it need training and certification. After
jumping through all the hoops, ADF&G successfully applied Rotenone to
the infected lake in September 2000. No yellow perch have been reported
since the eradication efforts. While the process of getting permission
to apply the piscicide was lengthy and included advertising the plans,
there was criticism from legislators that the public wasn't sufficiently
involved in the process as there is fear among the public regarding
Rotenone. Because future applications of Rotenone for another
problematic invasive species (northern pike) in parts of Alaska may be
called for, ADF&G is in the process of developing an invasive pike
management plan that lays out both the public and government protocol
that must be followed before a future eradication action is allowed.

# **WRP Project Updates**

# **Cross Boundary *Spartina* Control and Eradication** -- 

# (Kevin Anderson, Puget Sound Water Quality Action Team)

\[See slides\]

This project involved eradication and control of *Spartina angelica* in
Boundary Bay on the US-BC, Canada border. This species invades rapidly,
disrupts salt water ecosystems and critical habitat. The *Spartina*
infestation in BC can reinvade Puget Sound. By controlling in BC, they
have successfully managed an invasion in Skagit County, Washington.

*Spartina angelica* is found in the mudflats and in a vegetative
marshland environment.

The effort included a lot of outreach, recruitment of volunteers, and
GIS mapping of the infested area. Methods of eradication were hand
pulling and mechanical control of clones and seedlings. The removed
plant and roots were put in black plastic bags and then incinerated.

The \$2,500 WRP money leveraged the interagency cooperation and
equipment, got \$23,000 in new BC funds and \$12,000-14,000 in matching
funds.

Results: established a protocol for eradication and control.

Next steps: continue monitoring, re-treat as necessary and evaluate
alternative treatments.

# **Estuarine Database -**

(Joan Cabreza, EPA, presented on behalf of Henry Lee)

Cabreza explained the species database that has expanded to 460 invasive
species in Washington, Oregon and California. The work continues to
expand. The database now lists all the estuaries where a species is
located -- and is available in an Excel file. Some things are still
missing, including Q&A from grey papers.

\[See slides\]

An alpha version of the database was demonstrated and is available for
testing by those interested. Henry Lee is interested in comments from
WRP participants of what they would like to see that is not included in
the database. A beta version is expected by December 2004. They will be
looking for people to do beta testing in early 2005.

# **Educational Material Catalog on Searchable Database -**

(Robyn Draheim, Portland State University)

Draheim presented a searchable database to coordinate outreach and
published materials. It presently has 120 records and is searchable. The
next step will be online publication of the database which will allow
instantaneous review of the catalogued material and will allow expansion
of the catalogued material. The database will be maintained in MS
Access. New features will be added to the database as it is published on
line, allowing for easy expansion, images available for many materials,
URLs linked for easy download when available, and online submission of
new materials availability. Users who want to submit new materials will
be required to register with the site and there will be a review and
approval procedure for the submission. The online version will be
available for testing by the end of September 2004. Volunteers to do
beta testing were encouraged.

# **Joint Western Governors' Association Project-**

(Scott Smith, Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife)

Progress is being made working with states to implement programs to
address invasive species using the WRP "Recommendations of State
Actions." The WRP sent a letter to the Western Governors' Association to
ask for assistance in presenting an ANS resolution at their summer
meeting. A resolution was passed (copy in meeting packet). One aspect of
the resolution was that "the Western Governors Association shall convene
an Aquatic Invasive Species Working Group to develop, fund, and
implement a comprehensive program to prevent the spread of aquatic
invasive species in the water resources of western states."

The Western Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies also passed a
resolution encouraging its member states to adopt the recommendations of
the Western Regional Panel (copy in meeting packet). The result is to
bring all the western governors and the fish and wildlife agencies
together

A grant is being sought to implement the charges in the resolutions.

# **Member Reports**

(Facilitated by Bob Piorkowski)

Susan Ellis thanked outgoing Chairman Scott Smith and Vice Chair Jim
Athearn. Both received engraved Leatherman tools.

Tina Proctor announced the following changes in WRP representatives:

New members: Linda Drees -- National Park Service

Robert Leavitt, new alternate representative for California

Robin Knox, new representative for Colorado, replacing Gary Ziba.

Eileen Ryce, new representative for Montana.

Pat Lim has moved onto another job.

Kathy Hamel, new representative for the Western Aquatic Plant Management
Society

Karen McDowell -- co-chair of the work plan committee -- San Francisco
Estuary Project.

(Written member reports were submitted before the meeting. The reports
are available as an appendix to the Minutes as a separate document.)

Paul Heimowitz for FWS, LCDR Keith Ward for USCG, Joan Cabreza for EPA,
Bob Piorkowski for Alaska, Al Van Vooren in place of Fred Partridge for
Idaho, Jeff Shearer for South Dakota, Dr. Earl Chilton for Texas, Susan
Ellis for California, Eileen Ryce for Montana, Karen McDowell for the
San Francisco Estuary Project, Kevin Anderson for the Puget
Sound/Georgia Basin International Task Force, each presented brief
highlights of their written reports.

# **Non Member Reports/Public Comment**

Doug Jensen, University of Minnesota Sea Grant gave a report on
activities in Minnesota. The *Aquatic Invasive Species: Hazard Analysis
and Critical Control Point Program* curriculum originally developed by
the Great Lakes Sea Grant Network to eliminate the risk for spread of
aquatic invasive species (AIS) by aquaculture, wild baitfish harvest,
and fish hatcheries has been adapted for fisheries management,
researcher, and conservation officer activities. A new curriculum
booklet is about to go to press -- stay tuned. Based on surveys, over
95% of Minnesota boaters and anglers are taking actions at water
accesses to prevent the spread of AIS. Zebra mussels remain only in two
inland lake locations, one in a tributary that flows into the
Mississippi River. Spread of Eurasian watermilfoil continues to be slow.
These outcomes strongly suggest that public education continues to
prevent the spread of AIS. Salt cedar was found in an abandoned mine pit
and has since been eradicated by DNR. A pond on the University of
Minnesota Duluth campus where koi, goldfish and other AIS were found was
drained. Residual standing water was treated with rotenone and the AIS
were eradicated.

# **Challenges of Managing Ballast Water In Alaska**

(Tom Colby of Alaska Tanker Company, and Catherine Huot, U.S. Coast
Guard)

Alaska Tanker Company has a fleet of eight ships currently in the
TransAlaska Pipeline Service (TAPS) trade, of which one is out of
service and three have double bottoms. The double-bottom tankers will be
out of TAPS service in approximately six months because of Oil Pollution
Act of 1990 (OPA 90) retirement dates. There are five tankers in Alaska
Tanker Company's fleet with "J" ballast tanks.

Colby explained recent testing of ozone treatments on ballast water and
the challenges with different classes of vessels and different designs
of dealing with ballast water exchange. In the new vessels, it is
intended that all of the functions can be done from the wheelhouse
during the ballast water exchange.

Alaska Tanker Company is presently testing ozone treatment to clean
water and kill organisms in ballast water. Ozone has never been used on
board ships in the treatment of ballast water. The testing is presently
being conducted on the TT/V *Tonsina,* a 125,000 dwt tanker. The
challenge is to pipe ozone into diffusers all the way through the "J"
tanks and ensure that it kills all the organisms. Testing is ongoing,
both chemical and microbiological.

The focus of the next stage is engineering and the need to reduce
installation costs once the effectiveness of the ozone treatment is
proven. The focus will also be on obtaining U.S. government grants for
additional funding. Congress awarded Nutech O3 a grant. Full-scale
testing will be performed during the first and second quarters of 2005
aboard the T/V *Prince William Sound*. Final published results are
scheduled for the third quarter of 2005.

Catherine Huot, USCG-Valdez, stated that USCG wants to see that the
risks are defined (by the stakeholders) and USCG will define the
performance standards to mitigate that risk. USCG wants to see industry
be innovative to meet the risks.

LCDR Ward added that a draft EIS is being developed. On treatment
technologies, the USCG is presently asking for public comment on what
effective treatment technology is and how effectiveness should be
measured. USCG is also looking at what are acceptable standards for
zooplankton.

# **New Zealand Mud Snails**

Billie Kerans of Montana State University made a presentation on current
research on New Zealand mudsnails

\[See slides\]

The New Zealand mudsnail is a very small snail (5-7 mm). It can disperse
long distances and can survive outside of water for some lengths of time
(up to 20 days in damp media). How it travels is not known, but it could
have been transported in ballasts. It is a freshwater snail but can live
in brackish water as well. Humans and animals can also transport it on
fur, clothing, equipment or boats. It can float on vegetation and
downstream dispersal is a problem. It invaded Europe in the 19^th^
century and spread all over Europe. It was first found in North America
in the Snake River in mid-1980s. The biggest infestation is in the
Greater Yellowstone Park area.

Most invasive populations are primarily female and clonal. They brood
internally and are fully functional at birth, so it naturalizes very
easily.

It is tolerant of abiotic conditions. Population densities in some areas
are greater than 200,000 per square meter on cobble in Greater
Yellowstone. They can dominate macroinvertebrate assemblages.

New Zealand mudsnails eat the algae on the rocks that are the food
sources of other benthic macroinvertebrates. Populations may reduce food
resources at the bottom of the food web and may compete with other
macroinvertebrates. They compete with other grazers in small-scale
experiments. However, the evidence of effects is not strong from the
field. The New Zealand mudsnail has a hard shell and may not be good
resource for fish. It is not eaten by fish, and there is not statistical
significance in the fish growth rates in areas where there are New
Zealand mud snails.

Conclusions: They continue to spread rapidly and will probably be found
in many aquatic habitats. There is evidence from small scale experiments
that it will have a negative affect on other macroinvertebates. Evidence
from larger-scale surveys shows little effect on macroinvertebrates, but
some reduction of periphyton. Evidence appears to indicate that fish do
not eat New Zealand mud snails. Future focus will be on how to control
the spread and protect sensitive areas, clearly define habitats at risk,
determine the effects to native biota, and the mechanisms of control.

# **WRP Recommendations to States -- Update**

(Tina Proctor, Panel Coordinator)

Tina Proctor updated the Panel on the WRP recommendations to States.

She noted that there is some overlap in the areas of the ANS management
plan regions. There are presently five states with approved ANS
management plans.

1.  Appoint a State ANS or Invasive Special Coordination:

Alaska, Oregon, Washington, California, Montana and Kansas have full
time coordinators

2.  Establish state ANS or Invasive Species Committees:

Washington, Oregon, Utah, Idaho, Montana have established state ANS or

ISC.

3.  Create a State ANS Management Plan:

5 states have ANS Plans: Washington, Oregon, Montana, Alaska, Hawaii

5 have draft plans: Arizona, California, Idaho, Kansas, North Dakota

4.  Appoint a Representative to the WRP

Idaho, Nebraska and Hawaii do not yet have an official designated

representative to the WRP.

8 states have representatives but funding is inadequate.

5.  Provide a Long-Term Stable Source of State Funding

Montana is funding to match the ANS funding monies, but stable funding
is a

problem for nearly all the states.

Only 5 states have partial funding.

6.  Implement Programs to Prevent the Spread of Invasive Species from
    Boating.

Proctor suggested the need to include Canadian provinces on the maps.

Full participation along the 100^th^ meridian.

7.  Create a State early detection and rapid response, etc.

Only 4 states have plans for specific species, but are not fully funded.

All others do not.

All states that are developing an ANS plan will have to have a rapid
response

plan as part of the ANS plan.

8\. State authority to designate water that contains invasive
species.\*\*\*

6 states have authority are designating waters as "infested" or as
"water

quality limited": Washington, Oregon, California, Nevada and Montana.

9.  Implement a Non-native species classification program

5 states have screening and classification system with multiple
categories: Washington, Oregon, Nebraska, Montana, Hawaii

It was noted that Alaska has a screening and classification system,
i.e., in that

all importation has to be by permit.

# **Reports from the Other Regional Panels**

(Tom Mosher reported on the Mississippi River Basin Panel.)

\[See slides\]

The MRBP has met twice in 2004 and is in its infancy. Membership is 46
plus alternates, 21 interested parties, Total of 71 in coordination
directory. Have same interests generally as those in the WRP.

Asian carp (silver and bighead carp) are the top basin-wide ANS
problems, followed by the zebra mussel. Other priority species of the
sub-basins are: round goby, Eurasian watermilfoil, hydrilla, white
perch, NZMS, and others.

Mosher said there is a need to develop a database of experts and
research

There will be a risk assessment workshop at the next MRBP meeting.

They would like to recommend to the ANS task force that the ANS Task
Force place a high priority and strong focus on prevention -- especially
on introductions into the country, as well as interstate, inter-basin,
and intra-basin spread of ANS. The MRBP would like to see a strong
screening process of all imports. States are limited in their responses
to international and interstate commerce, as well as funding projects
outside their borders, so federal leadership and funding is needed in
several areas.

The MRBP recommendations to the ANS Task Force include:

that the Task Force and regional panels should continue to seek
coordination across panels, such as joint panel meetings of adjacent
states; national prohibitions (with listed exceptions) on transport of
aquatic plants; establishment of a national contingency fund for rapid
response, so that not all the burden falls on a state that may have been
brought about by the cross-border infestation from another state or an
individual.

# **San Francisco Bay Delta Invasive Species Database**

(Ted Grosholz, University of California Davis)

Ted Grosholz demonstrated a new Access database specific to the San
Francisco Bay Delta region. It was extracted from the SERC database and
made specific to their region. It will be available for beta testing
soon.

He said he would not want to see ten or so different databases, but
would hope that this database, as with others, become part of a national
database that is accessible and have the same information.

### September 9, 2004

### WRP Business Meeting -- Al Van Vooren, Vice Chair

Al Van Vooren called the meeting to order at 8:10 a.m. He thanked
PWSRCAC for hosting the meeting and Marilyn Leland and Adelheid Herrmann
for the previous evening's social event at the Alaska Heritage Center.
He thanked all who put the agenda together, and Tina Proctor,
Coordinator.

Van Vooren announced that there were 25 voting members at meeting.

Motion and second to approve the Minutes of September 9-11, 2003. The
motion passed.

Van Vooren reported that the Executive Committee met during the year and
minutes were on the website. Also the email for WRP panel members is
<wrp@water.ca.gov>

# 2004 Budget Report

A 2004 budget report was distributed. There was a \$50,000 appropriation
from USFWS to WRP. The funds are being managed by the Pacific States
Marine Fisheries Commission to allow carryover of funds from year to
year. Total projects approved \$40,000. Not all funds were spent, but
money will carryover. There was \$10,000 carryover from 2003. \$11,000
went to travel of members to attend meetings. \$2,500 for 2004 annual
meeting costs.

\$6,500 remaining to be used for pamphlet "Threats to the West"
brochure.

# Discussion of membership issues/requirements

Tina Proctor led a discussion of membership issues and went over the
membership requirements. She reported that there was presently 56 voting
member positions, of which 49 were presently filled. Idaho, Nebraska,
HI, Guam, the Mexican Federal position, the Bureau of Reclamation, and
the at-large inland position were all open at the present time.

The voting positions for tribal regions and other interests are
four-year terms.

At the fourth year WRP meeting, the Panel shall reappoint or select a
new representative. FY2005 will be the fourth-year Panel meeting, so
decisions will have to be made at that point. The Executive Committee
will also be elected in 2005. There are eight members on the Executive
Committee, and they are all elected at one time. Members can serve for
more than one term. She asked present members to start thinking about
whether they want to serve for an additional term.

The Chair and Vice Chair are elected every calendar year. For 2004, Sue
Ellis was Chair and Al Van Vooren was Vice Chair. They may be re-elected
for a subsequent term. Elections are to be held in January of each year.

Blaine Parker asked how the Guide to Procedures may be amended if new
members were to be included. He was particularly concerned that only
four members of tribes are represented, whereas in the western region
area there are potentially hundreds of tribes who control large areas of
land that are and could be at risk for non-indigenous species invasions.
It was suggested that he and Adeleheid Hermann work together to flesh
out the issue during the next year.

# Old Business

Selection of Work Plan Committee work -- (This was a separate agenda
item to follow business meeting.)

# New Business

No new business.

Mark Systma moved to adjourn. Joan Cabreza seconded, and the motion
carried.

*\[This concluded the business meeting.\]*

## [Work Plan Committee Presentation]{.underline} -- 

## (Facilitated by Karen McDowell and Tom Grosholz)

Karen McDowell explained that \$30,000 in funding was available at the
start for 2004. The PSMFC administration takes 15%, leaving \$25,500
approx. to fund small projects. Committee agreed with PSMFC to limit the
number of projects to three. The committee was now working on
formalizing the process.

The committee was limiting the funding to between one and three projects
of \$5,000 minimum and \$25,500 maximum. McDowell listed the WRP
Priorities. Favorable qualities of the proposals considered were
availability of matching funds, seed money and low overhead. Proposals
were open to application from non-members with member support.

The task before the WRP was to select the projects to go forward from
the nine submitted. Each proposer was given three minutes to make
his/her proposal, followed by short discussion period. Each proposal was
documented and summarized in a handout. (*See handout for details.)*

The Panel discussed the benefits of each project to the WRP. Conflicts
of interest of WRP members voting for proposals in which they had an
interest were also discussed. It was agreed that with such a small group
and a modest amount of money involved, any conflict of interest was
insignificant. However, it was also agreed that the work plan committee
come up with more recommendations for resolving conflict of interest
issues for the future.

It was agreed that the voting procedure would consist of each member
having three votes, regardless of whether they had a proposal on the
table.

An open discussion followed on the proposals:

**Summary of voting on project proposals**

> **For** **Cost of proposal**

WA/BC Rapid Assessment 17 \$ 5,000

Mexico hull fouling 9

Non-native brook trout 0

ANS early detection/watersheds 16 \$10,000

Zebra mussel in the El Dorado 5

Zebra mussel in Missouri River 2

NZMS biota factors 8

WGA video 6

Plant Research priorities workshop 14 \$ 5,750

> Total: \$20,750

Since the work plan committee limited the selection (at the request of
Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission) to no more than three projects, it
was agreed (22 in favor) that the remaining funds (\$4,250) be divided
between the three projects. The Executive Committee will distribute as
needed the remaining funds, taking into consideration whether the
winning proposals receive the matching grants anticipated in their
respective proposals. Note: Since the meeting, the Executive Committee
has decided to give the remaining funds to the number 4 project, Mexico
hull fouling.

**[100^th^ Meridian Initiative Project Updates]{.underline}**

# **Zebra Mussels in the Missouri River**

(Jeff Shearer, South Dakota Department of Fish, Game and Parks)

Jeff Shearer gave an overview of the zebra mussels in the Missouri River
and what states are doing to date about the invasion.

\[See slides\]

There was a rapid expansion of zebra mussel populations from 1988 to the
mid-1990s in the Great Lakes area. In 1999 one shall was found near
Sioux City, Iowa. SDGFG contracted with Larry Hesse to look for zebra
mussels in the Missouri River. No adult ZM were found. Veligers were
found below Ft. Randall and Gavin's Point Dams.

SDFGP approached hatcheries and reviewed their protocols to make sure
that no veligers are transported between lake and river waters.
Fisheries sampling gear protocols were modified to prevent the spread of
zebra mussel veligers. The department focused on outreach and education
efforts on zebra mussels throughout. The department is continuing to
monitor and sample through Larry Hesse and the department's own efforts.
Very remote areas of South Dakota make intensive sampling difficult.

An action plan will be established for the Missouri National
Recreational Reach which is based on the St. Croix National Scenic
Riverway Plan. A zebra mussel awareness day was instituted at Lewis &
Clark State Park, which offered free boat/trailer power washes and
public awareness was raised through media announcements and "Zap the
Zebra' brochure.

# **Zebra Mussels in Kansas**

(Tom Mosher, Kansas Wildlife and Parks)

\[See slides\]

Zebra mussels were first found in the El Dorado, Kansas, in August 2003
in colonies of approximately 55 per sq. meter and most less than 10 mm.
Veligers were found through the lake and in the spillway of the El
Dorado in September. Mussels were found in 17 ft of water in October.
They were found throughout the lake in September 2003.

A stakeholders meeting was held in October 2003 to line out what could
be done in the reservoir and come up with a unified message for the
public from that point on. A lake draw-down was proposed to kill zebra
mussel along the shoreline. Only 3.5 feet was done in mid-December
because public sentiment would not allow further depth. The objective
was to kill the zebra mussels by drying and freezing along the
shorelines and to determine the extent of the population. A public
meeting was held on November 18, 2003, but it was not well attended by
the public. A Zebra Mussel Response Team meeting was held the following
day, attended by various agencies and stakeholders and they discussed
surveys needed to be done, rapid response, etc. (See slides)

The draw-down was completed by December 23, 2003. They found populations
higher than forecast, a lot more extensive, and slightly larger in size.
Indications are that some of the mussels were as old as three years and
as big as 25 mm.

2004 activities included: Post signs on the reservoir and, beginning in
April, began zooplankton tows to get some idea of the amount and
densities. Samples were taken from three veliger sites in the spring.
Other signs have been added to the initial ones and given to all
mariners and marine park operators. Leaflets are placed on windshields
of vehicles in parking areas. The Kansas Department of Health is doing
the monitoring at the sites.

Results in 2004: Veliger samples at El Dorado were higher than in
September 2003. No veligers were found in late April but were present by
late May. Densities peaked in mid-June and declined thereafter through
November; December samples were negative. Zebra mussels were found on
native species of mussel, and all along the shoreline, and in the
previous year's draw-down area. Because water from the reservoir is
released frequently by the Corps of Engineers, veligers have been found
in the Walnut River below the reservoir, and veligers were discovered in
Kaw Reservoir, OK during the summer.

Assessing the Potential Ecological and Economic Impacts Of Zebra Mussels
to Western River Systems

(Jon Brossenbroek, Univ. of Notre Dame)

Jon Brossenbroek presented his assessment model of zebra mussels in the
Colorado and Columbia River reservoirs.

\[See slides\]

There is a known threat in the Colorado and Columbia River watersheds
and the potential economic and environmental impacts are large. Zebra
mussels were discovered in May on trailered boats at the
Washington-Idaho border and in Lake Mead. The model looked at the
prediction of the potential dispersal of zebra mussels based on the
current distribution of zebra mussels in the US and 11 geologic and
environmental variables. It looked at boater movement as a dispersal
mechanism and tried to quantify it.

Conclusion to date: Zebra mussels are not marching across the landscape
but their range is still expanding. Initial expansion was due to
shipping traffic. Recent spread is the result of recreational boater
movements. The probabilities of spread by recreational boating in the
areas studied were predicted to be low but not zero.

Brossenbroek is now looking at what thresholds need to be crossed to
trigger control and prevention efforts. That information should be
available within a year. The project has one more year to go before
completion.

### NAISA Status/Implementation 

(Allegra Cangelosi, Northeast-Midwest Institute)

\[See slides\]

The most recent authorization of federal statute concerning aquatic
invasive species (NISA 1996) expired in 2002. Comprehensive
reauthorization legislation was introduced in 2003/04 (NAISA) and
various congressional committees are holding hearings. Most recently the
Senate Commerce Committee held hearings on SB 2490 would reauthorize the
ballast water component only.

The IMO agreement has a staged implementation of a standard for ballast
water according to the date by which a vessel entered service and by the
ballast weight of the vessel.

Conclusions: At this late point in the congressional session and an
election year, legislation will require bi-cameral and bi-partisan
agreement to happen. A research bill and an IMO-like ballast bill are
the most possible legislations, but not certain. Next year may make for
better quality debate as IMO provisions are vetted.

# **Organizational Updates**

**ANS Task Force** --

(Everett Wilson, Acting Secretary, ANS Task Force)

Sharon Gross has left the USFWS and joined the U.S. Geological Survey
and Kari Duncan has been hired to replace her.

Wilson reviewed the changes being made as a result of May 2004 ANS Task
Force Meeting in Missouri and the timelines for various submittals

\[See slides\]

# **Invasive Species Advisory Committee --**

# (Diane Cooper, Taylor Shellfish Farms)

# 

# Cooper reviewed the NISC's interagency performance budget, key documents on the website, and upcoming activities of the ISAC activities. 

# 

# \[See slides\]

# 

# **Canada: National Strategy to Deal with the Threat of Invasive Species**

(Gary Caine, British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture, Food and
Fisheries)

Caine made a presentation on the present efforts of the Canadian
government to deal with aquatic invasive species in British Columbia and
the history of Canada's attempts to deal with NIS issues in the past.

\[See slides\]

# **Exotic Freshwater Fishes of Mexico --** 

# (Dr. Salvador Contreras-Balderas)

Dr. Contreras- Balderas reported that interest in ANS in the
introductions of exotic species is just beginning in Mexico. He has been
commissioned to do a book on the freshwater fishes of Mexico by the
National Commission on Biodiversity in Mexico. He said there is a marked
increase in exotics populations that arrived via various vectors.
Several species have been introduced to the La Amistad Reservoir by both
Mexico and USA. Neither Mexico nor the USA has consulted with the other
side on the problem.

\[See slides\]

Worst case#1: *Hemichromis guttatus* -- has invaded Rio Mezquires and
eats stromatolites and some small fish, competing with the endemic
chichlid (herichthys minckleyi).

Worst case #2: *Loricariids* group: have been released accidentally in
Rio Balsas, Brio Grijalva-Usumacinta. Over 70% of Tilapia fish catch
lost, 3,000 fishermen and 43,000 local inhabitants impacted, economic
loss = \$12 million/year.

Special cases of NIS are that of fishes of lowlands, brackish or marine
waters becoming established in upstream areas. These species compete,
displace, or harm the local native species.

There is no regulation or enforcement of the intentional or
unintentional introduction of non-native species from aquaculture
operations in Mexico. Some introductions are from the public's release
of aquarium fish into local streams.

# **Northern Pike Impacts on Native Fish** -- 

# (Dave Rutz, Alaska Dept. Fish & Game)

# 

\[See slides\]

Northern Pike was first introduced in Alaska's northern river drainages
in the 1950s to an area roughly the size of Indiana. The problem is the
Susitna drainage morphology. All five species of Pacific salmon reside
in the river drainage and their paths will cross with Northern Pike.
Many streams and lakes that probably had healthy populations of rainbow
trout and salmon are now exclusively Northern Pike. Some public love
them and some hate them, and some feel ADF&G should manage Northern Pike
as a sport fish. After a flood, they spilled over into all the northern
streams of Cook Inlet. Presently there is no bag or possession limit for
Northern Pike. ADF&G is presently studying and evaluating the impact of
Northern Pike on salmon populations. It does provide an enormous growth
as a sport fishery, but a problem in how to manage this invasive
species. The study's goal is to provide managers the necessary tools to
deal with Northern Pike. Radio telemetry is being used to track the
species.

Study findings suggest Northern Pike is selective and will take salmon
over sticklebacks and others species as food source of choice.

**[Habitattitude]{.underline} -**

(Doug Jensen, Minnesota Sea Grant)

Jensen gave an overview of "*Habitattitude^TM^*", a new national public
education campaign created by the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council
(PIJAC), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and NOAA's Grant Lakes Sea
Grant Network aimed at preventing the release of fish and aquatic plants
by aquarists and water gardeners into the environment. The campaign is
scheduled to debut at the SuperZoo Trade Show in Las Vegas on September
23, 2004.

There is an increasing frequency of aquatic plans and fish and other
animals associated with the pet industry being found in the environment.
Most hobbyists are unaware of the impacts a release can cause.
*Habitattitude^TM^* is a proactive, nationally branded campaign
targeting aquarists and water gardeners and providing a solution to meet
the challenge that focuses on public awareness, engaging people and
promoting unifying environmental messages with corresponding beneficial
actions. All segments of the industry are part of the solution. The
program gives alternatives to release, and may be modified as the
campaign rolls out. Jensen welcomed suggestions from the WRP on the
project. To date, PIJAC and its members have contributed \$1.1 million
to the project. USFWS has contributed 100,000, and Sea Grant has
contributed \$300,000.

Over the coming year the program will be visiting trade shows and retail
stores and distributing materials through distribution networks.
.Interested regional panels, federal, state, and tribal agencies,
academic institutions, businesses, and hobby clubs and societies can
join the campaign. By joining, partners can help to promote unifying
prevention messages aimed at protecting and conserving our water
resources. He invited the WRP to be the first regional panel to become a
member of *Habitattitude^TM^.*

Motion by Anita Schall that the WRP endorse and support the
*Habitattitude^TM^* program. Seconded by Karen McDowell. There was no
discussion. The motion passed unanimously.

### Latent Invasiveness- 

### (John Chapman, Oregon State University)

\[See slides\]

Invasion rates of ANS are increasing and impacts are increasing and
states do not have enough resources.

Chapman gave an example of the periwinkle snail *(Littorina littorea*
that showed up in Pictou, Nova Scotia in 1840. In 160 years, the
population migrated down the East Coast to New Jersey before it was
studied. Fifteen fossils shells that were pre-Columbus were found in
Nova Scotia. Two shells were from the only Viking campsite in North
America and it is thought the Vikings brought the snails with them.
Solid ballast was introduced in 1840. It is thought the snails probably
moved down the coast with the shipping trade through the ballast
mechanism. *Littornina littorea* is the oldest introduced invasive
species in North America.

Every introduced species are vectors, are significant, and every
population has the potential to explode long after introduction. In the
case of the periwinkle it took 800 years. The impact of introduced
species is often underestimated.

### Public Comment

Bob Piorkowski commented on fin-fish farming. Alaska has taken a stand
against fin-fish farming. He applauded British Columbia for its efforts
to prevent escapes from their farms, but a fish farm will be very close
to Alaska soon and is of concern. ADF&G is looking at how to protect
Alaska's wild stocks.

Everett Wilson addressed the issue of sport fishing tournaments and
zebra mussels. He reminded people that the Lacey Act (federal) can be
enforced against boats coming from outside a state (with regard to
controlling zebra mussels invasions), even if a state does not have its
own regulations.

Dave Rutz clarified any misconception from his earlier comments about
Alaska salmon populations with the reassurance that 90% of salmon stocks
in Alaska's Susitna drainages are in clear tributaries, and most of the
salmon populations in the Susitna drainage system are at all-time highs.

### Next Steps for WRP/Location of Next Meeting

Next meeting \-- Wichita, Kansas

It was suggested that the Mississippi River Panel attend and have a
joint meeting with the WRP and to include a field trip to the zebra
mussels in the El Dorado reservoir.

## Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 4:30 p.m.

### Friday, September 10, 2004

Dave Rutz, ADFG led participants on a field trip by airplane to see the
impacts of Northern Pike.