# MASSACHUSETTS AQUATIC INVASIVE
SPECIES MANAGEMENT PLAN

MASSACHUSETTS AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES WORKING GROUP

Prepared by: The Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management

DECEMBER 2002

### Table of Contents

Acknowledgem e nts....................................................................................i Executive S u mm ary...................................................................................ii I. Introduction.........................................................................................1 Scope of the Aquatic Invasive Species Managem e nt Plan..............................2
Process and Participation....................................................................3 Relationship to Existing AI S Managem e nt Efforts......................................3 II. Existing Authorit ies and Program s.............................................................9 Federal Authorities...........................................................................9 Federal Program s and Activities..........................................................10 State Authorities and Program s ...........................................................12 International Agreem ents..................................................................16 Legislative Efforts..........................................................................17 III. Prob lem s and Concerns......... ...............................................................18 Aquatic Invasive Species Im pacts.......................................................18 Managem e nt Priorities.....................................................................18 Transport V ectors..................................................................19 Priority Species.....................................................................24 IV. Managem e nt Objectives and Actions.......................................................32 Coordination................................................................................33 Prevention...................................................................................34 Monitoring..................................................................................41 Early Detection/Eradication...............................................................43 Control.......................................................................................45 Education....................................................................................48 Research......................................................................................50 Legislation...................................................................................51
V. I m plem e n tation Table..........................................................................52 VI. Program Monitoring and Evaluation........................................................53 VII. Glossary.........................................................................................54 Citations..............................................................................................56 Appendices Appendix A: Aquatic Invasive Species W o rking Group Membership Appendix B: Public Scoping Meetings Appendix C: Grant Program s Appli cable to Aqua tic Invasiv e Species Appendix D: Summary of Research Activities Appendix E: Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Docum e nted in New England

### Acknow ledgements

This plan w a s created by the Massachusetts Aquatic Invasive Sp ecies Working Group, a

m e mber group of the Massachusetts Secret ary of Environm e n tal Affairs’ Council on Invasive Species established to develop and im plem ent strate gies to com b at the growing problem of i nvasive species in the Commo nwealth. The Aquatic Invasive Species Working Group included 18 representatives of 14 state and federal agencies and academ ic institu tion s . The W o rking Group was co-chaired by Susan Snow-Cotter (Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Managem e nt), Jim Straub (Massachusetts Departm e nt of Environmental Managem e nt ), and Jan Sm ith (Massachusetts Bays National Estuary Program ). Jay Baker (M assach usetts Office of Coastal Zone Managem e nt) was the p r im ary author. Judy Ped e rson (M ass achusetts In stitu te of Technology Sea Grant Program ) provided consid erable technical and m o ral support. Graduate students Cory Riley and S h a nnon W e igle also contributed to various

com ponents of Plan developm ent.

The W o rking Group was also assisted by the efforts of the Federal Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, and, in particular, th e contribution of Sandra Keppner (US Fish and
W ildlif e Service).

The m e mbers of the W o rking Group include d (in alphabetical order): Jay Baker (Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Ma nagem e nt), Steve Block (Massachusetts Wetland Restoration Program ), Cynthia Boettn e r (US Fish a nd W ildlif e Service, Ne w England Invasive Plant Group), Jim Fair (Ma ssachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries), Mike Gildesgam e (Massachusetts Departm e nt of Environm ental Managem e nt), Deb Hadden (Massport), Sandra Keppner (US Fish and W ildlife Service), Taryn LaScola (Massachusetts Departm e nt of Food and Agriculture), Rick McVoy (Massachusetts Departm e nt of Environmental P r otection), Br ad Mitch e ll (M assachus etts Departm e nt of Food and Agriculture), Paul Mucha (US Co ast Guard), Judy Pederson (Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sea Grant), Olga Qu irin (US Environm ental Protection Agency,
Jan Sm ith (Massachusetts Bays National Estuary Program ), Susan Snow-Cotter (Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Ma nagem e nt), Paul Som e rs (Massachusetts Division of Fish and W i ldlife), Jim Straub (M assachusetts D e partm e nt of Environm e n tal Managem e nt), Sally Yozell (Battelle Co rporation), and Ma rc Zimmer m an (US Geological Survey).

i

### Executive Summary

The intentional and accide ntal introduction of noni ndigenous species into the
Commonwe a lth of Massachusetts is not a new phenom enon. In fact, we can assum e that the hum an-assisted m o vem e nt of spe c ies, both plant and anim al, has occurred since hum a ns first inhabited this re gion. It was not until recent decades that the globalization of our economy and with it, the rapid move m e nt of both people and goods, indirectly resulted in a corresponding rise in rates of species introduc tions. Many of these species introductions have been seem ingly harm less while others have been extrem ely problem atic and/or expensive. The introducti on of invasive species is thought to be second only to habitat loss in c ontributing to declining biodiv ersity throughout the United
States. W h ile Massachusetts has been fortuna te thus far to have averted the big nam e aquatic inva ders like zeb ra m u ssels and the Chine s e m itten cra b, m a ny other les s er known species have m o ved into the state and now call it hom e.

Problem atic m a rine invaders that have beco m e established in Massachusetts include the European green crab, As ian shore crab, lace b r yo zoan, codiu m , and vario u s species of sea squirts and shellfish pathogens. Marine speci es of concern (due to their proxim ity to Massachus etts and/o r ag gressiv e ten d encies ) include the veined rapa whelk, nori, Chinese

m itten crab, the Pacif i c o y ster, and ca uler pa. On the f r eshwate r f

r ont, aqua tic

m acrophytes such as water chestnut and Eurasi an water m ilfoil have becom e established and are aggressively spreading in lakes and ponds. In addition, common reed and purple loosestrife are rapidly clogging waterways a nd outcom peting native species. Although the zebra mussel has yet to be docum ented in Massachusetts, it is found in the Connecticut side of the Housatonic watershed, v e ry clos e to the Ma ssachusetts border. The Asian clam and other species of aqua tic m a c r ophytes such as hydrilla and giant salvinia are causing problem s in nearby states and have a reasonable chance of m a king it to Massachusetts if conditions are favorable.

Generally speaking, responses to the spread of aquatic invasi ve species have been slow and poorly coordinated. The introduction and subsequent spr ead of freshwater

m acrophytes has probably received the m o st attention from natural resource m a nagers due to the impacts of these invasions on boating, fishing, and other recreational uses. On a lake by lake basis, landowner groups, with support from the state, have tried to control further species spread with lim ited su ccess. On th e m a rine sid e , the Europ e an green crab has caused the m o st tangible im pacts and thus is best known. Attem p ts to eradicate and/or control this voracious shellfish pred ator have proven ineffective. Outside of fishery and aquaculture circles, the general public is not aware of the im pact that invasive species have on our m a rine ecosystem and local econom y. State and federal agencies have lim ited jurisdiction and/or m a ndate to a ddress aquatic species issues and sm all or non-existent budgets to deal with the wide range of sp ecies impacts that face local waterways.

The Massachusetts Aquatic Invasive Species Managem e nt Plan (The AIS Plan) is the first com p rehensive effort to assess the im pact s and threats of aquati c invasive species in Massachus etts. In r e spo n se to th e id entif ied im pacts and thre ats, th e AIS Plan lays ou t a series of m a nagem e nt strategies intended to curb the spread of invasive species.

iiThe AIS Plan outlin es an am bitious f i ve-yea r plan f

o r aquatic invasive spe c i es

m a nage m e nt in Massachusetts with the goal of implementing a coordinated approach to minimizing the ecological and socio-economic im pac ts of aquatic invasive species in the marine and freshwater environments of Massachusetts. The plan is constructed around eight general objectives: 1) coordinate AIS m a nagem e nt effort s; 2) prevent new introdu ction s of AIS to Massachus etts water s ; 3) m onitor the introdu ctio n of new invaders and the spread of established organism s; 4) de tect an d eradicate p i oneering invasive species posing high or unknown ri sk to Massachusetts aquatic ecosystem s before they becom e established; 5) control th e spread and distribution of AIS in infested water bodies and reduce the risk of dispersal to uninfested wa ters; 6) educate the public,

resource m a nagers, and industry representativ es regarding their role in preventing the introduction and transport of AIS; 7) continue to research an d identify new m easures for the prevention and control of AIS, and evalua te the effectiveness of existing m a nagem e nt

m easures; and 8) identify needs for additional legislation relating to the control of AIS. Each objective is supported by strategic actions and 99 specific tasks with lead agencies and budget identified (Table A). Plan priorities include staff to serve as the agency leads for plan im plem entation, conti nuation of current research on the relativ e risks of vario u s transport vectors, coordination with industr y to m i nim i ze invasions, developm ent of a regional web page and database on AIS distribution, and vari ous educational initiatives.

The AIS Plan follows guidance provided by the federal Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, which is co-chaired, by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adm i nistration and the US Fish and W ildlif e Service. O n ce the plan is approved, the Task Force provides
lim ited funds to support plan im plementati on. The AIS Plan was developed by the Massachusetts Aquatic Invasive Sp ecies W o rking Group, which includes 18 representatives of 14 state and federal agencies , as well as p r ivate and pu blic en tities. The W o rking Group m e t for approxim a tely 14 m onths to develop the AIS Plan. This

sam e group will lead plan im ple m entation.

The threat of invasive species appears overw helm ing and som e believe that such species expansion is inevitable. Due to this sens e of powerlessness, m a ny resource m a nagers and agencies have been relu ctant to tak e on the issue, despite pressure from a ffected user groups. In Massachusetts, we believe that by working together and m a xim i zing lim ited

resources we can stem t h e flow of s p ecies across our borders by educating the public and affected ind u stries on th e threat and im pact s of these spec ies

. It is im portant to acknowledg e that m o st of the pathways that species use to move from place to place – ballast water, boat fouling, private and public aquaria, aquaculture, seafood industry, etc.—are largely unregulated in term s of preventing species invasions. H o wever, by creatively raising awaren ess of these pathways and by changing behaviors of different users and industries, the like lihood of introductions can be significantly reduced. This Plan provides a blueprint for Massachusetts to make headway in protecting our natural system s and econom y from the potentially devast ating effects of aquatic invasive species.

iiiTable A : Implem entation Table and Budget Summ ery for the Massachusetts Aquatic

n v a s i v e S p e c i e s M a n a g e m e nt Plan. I

Planned Effo rts ($ 000/FTEs) Tasks/ A c tions FY '02 FY '03 Future Needs

d e d i c a t e d s e e k i n g d e d i c a t e d s e e k i n g Strateg i c A c ti on Task Description y e ar $ (000) FTE $ (000) FTE $ (000) FTE $ (000) FTE $(000)/ y r

1A Coordinate M assa chusetts A I S M a n a gement A c tiv i ties 1, ongoi n g 8 4 1

. 4 7 5 1. 2 5 8 4 1

. 4 7 5 1. 25 7 5

1B Coor di nate Wi th Other States and Nati ons 1, ongoi ng 37 0. 25 25 0. 25

1C Coor di nate w i th F e der a l A g enci es on A I S M a nagement ongoi ng 3 3

2 A A s sess the Risks of Priorit y A I S 1,2 330 60

2B Coor di nate w i th I n dustr i e s i n M a nagi ng A I S 1, 2

, ongoi ng 10

2C Educate I ndustr y Repr esentati v es 2

2D Improv e A I S Data M a nagement 1 31 0.2

2E Pr ev ent I n tr oductions Vi a Commercial Shi ppi ng 1, 2 29 5 10

2F Pr ev ent I n tr oductions Vi a Recr ea ti o n al Boati ng 1, 2

, ongoi ng 18 47 0. 2 45 0. 2 2

2G Pr ev ent I n tr oductions Vi a the Seafo od I ndustr y 1 10

2H Pr ev ent I n tr oductions Vi a the A q uacul t ur e I ndustr y 1, ongoi ng 7 0. 1 40 0. 5 40 0. 5 40

2I Pr ev ent I n tr oductions Vi a the Ba i t I n dustr y 1 7 0.1 5

2J Pr ev ent I n tr oductions Vi a A quati c Plant Dealers 1, 2

, ongoi ng 30 0. 5 30 0. 5

2K Pr ev ent I n t r oductions Vi a Research Faci li ties 1 to 5

2L Pr ev ent I n tr oductions Vi a A quati c Or gani sm Suppl i e r s 1 to 5

, ongoi ng 5

3A M onitor for A I S in M assachusett s C o astal Water s 1 to 5 50 10

3B M onitor for A I S in M assachusett s Fresh w a t e r S y stems 1, 2

, ongoi ng 1 5 0 3 5 0 0. 5 1 5 0 3 1 4 0 1. 5 9 5

3C A s sist in the Dev e lopment of Imp r oved M oni tori ng Technol ogi es 2

4A M onitor M assach usetts Wate rs for Ne w Inv asions as Outlined in Ob ject iv e 3

4B Identif y Reso urces fo r E r adicat ing Ne w I n tr oducti ons 1, 2, ongoi n g 6 0 1 8 5 7 2 1. 2 7 5 7 5

4C Dev e l op an Earl y Response Pr otoc ol 1 to 5

, ongoi ng 45 0.5 45 0.5 22.5

4D Ev al uate the R i sk of I n tr oducti ons o f Pr i o ri t y Species 2 30

5A I m pl e m ent Ea rl y R esponse Pr otocols Outli n ed in Objectiv e 4

5B Suppor t Dev e l opment of A I S Contr o l Technol ogi es 1, ongoi ng 2 2 2

5C Identif y Priorit y A I S for Management 1

5D Dissem inate Information on E x ist i n g Controls for P r io rit y Species 1, 2 465 440

5E Expand Fundi ng for A I S M a nageme nt 2 250 250

5F M onitor the Effect iv eness of A I S Control Efforts 2, ongoi n g 6 0

. 1 2 4 0. 2 6 0

. 1 2 4 0. 2 1 0

5G Contr o l Estab l i s h e d A quati c M a c r o p h y tes ongoi ng 65 65 30
6A Di stri bute Regi on al A I S Educati onal M a teri a l s 1, 2

, ongoi ng 5 5

6B Distribute M a te rials Targ eted at Prio rit y A I S 1, ongoi ng 16

6C Distribute M a te rials Targ eted at A I S Transport Vectors 1 to 5

, ongoi ng 35 20 20 10

7A Identif y Research Prio rit i es 1, 2

, ongoi ng 20 20

8A Ev al uate A u thor i t y to Restr i ct A I S Impor ts 2, ongoi ng 10

8B M ake Recommen d ations Regardin g Legislat iv e Needs 2, ongoi ng

Totals 1

, 6 2 3 7 4 8 8 3 1

, 1 2 5 6 6 0 1 4 3 8 2

T o t al Match (FY02-F Y 03) $ 2 ,748, 000
T o t al Sou g h t (F Y02-F Y 03) $ 1 ,089, 000

iv

### I. Introduction

The introduction and spread of aquatic invasiv e species (AIS) in the marine and freshwater environm ents of Massachusetts pose a serious threat to the ecology of native system s, and can effect the econom i c stab ility of the Comm onwealth. These nonindigenous species h a ve the potential to estab lish an d spread rapidly, due to a lack of physic al and biological constraints in the habitats to which they have been introdu ced. The range of im pacts these organisms can have on aquatic system s is extensive, includi ng th e loss of hab ita t a nd community diversity, the loc a lized or com p lete extinc tion o f rare and endangered species, the spread of human pathogens , and the choking of waterways, wate r intakes, and wetland system s.

The proliferation of aquatic i nvaders has com e at great cost to Massachusetts. W h ile no

com p rehensive study of econom ic impacts has been conducted, Massachusetts has expended significant funds for the m a nage m e nt of aquatic invaders, and has incurred the indirect costs associa t ed w ith th e im pacts of these species. S t a t e agenc i es s p ent over h a lf a m illion dolla rs in 2001 on the control of nonindigenous aquatic plants through cost share assistance and direct control efforts on state lands. This figure does not incl ude extensive control efforts undertaken by m unicipalities and private la ndowners, lost revenue due to decreased recreational boating, fishing, and swimming oppo rtunities, or docum en ted decreases in property values due to infestations of nei ghboring lakes and ponds by aquatic m acrophytes (Hsu, 2000). A Cornell University s t udy (Pim en tel, 1999 ) es tim ates a los s of $44 m illion per year to New England and the Canadian Maritim e Provinces due to predation on commercially valuable she llf ish by th e intr odu ced European green crab ( Carcinus maenas ). During the drafting of this plan the aqua tic invasive plant hydrilla ( Hydr illa ve rticilla ta ) was iden tif ied for the first tim e in Massachusetts in a Cape Cod pond. This notorious invader can spread rapidly within and between lakes and ponds, quickly altering the balance of aquatic system s. In addition to established invaders, nonindigeno us species known to have had disastrous effects on th e ecosystems and econo m i es of othe r states, such as the zebra m u ssel ( Dreissena polymorpha ), are rapidly encroaching upon the borders of Massachusetts and its w a tersheds

F i g u r e 1 )

. (

Figure 1 : Nove m b er 2000 zebra mussel distribution in the Northeastern US (USGS, 2002)

1Recognizing the im portance of th e invasive species issue, the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA) established the Council on Invasive Species (the Council) in 1999. The Council is charged with coordinati ng invasive species m a nagem e nt activities within the Comm onwealth, and facilitating forw ard m ove m e nt on new initiatives to prevent and control biological invasions in th e sta t e. This Massachus etts Aquatic Invasive Species Managem e nt Plan represents the efforts of the Aquatic Invasive Species Working Group, a subcomm ittee of the Council, to address the overarching goal of implementing a coordinated approach to minimizing the ecological and soci o-economic im pacts of aquatic invasive species in the marine and freshwat er environmen ts of Massachusetts. Mo re specific g o als addressed through the developm ent and im ple m e n tation of this m a nage ment plan are as
f o llows:

1) Educate the public about threats from aquati c invaders and m easures that can be taken to prevent their furthe r introduction and spread. 2) Reduce the potential for the introduction of AIS into Massachusetts waters through preventativ e m easures. 3) Control the spread of established AIS to uncolonized waters of Massachusetts. 4) Minim i ze harmful ecological , socioeconom ic, and public health and safety im pacts from aquatic invaders that have been introduced to Massachusetts waters.

Massachusetts has further rec ogn ized the lim ited success worl dwide in the eradication of estab lished populations of aquatic invaders, as well as th e p o tentially de trim ental im pacts to native populations resulting from som e invasive species cont rol efforts. As a result,

m a nagem e nt objectives a nd action s o u tlin ed in th e plan a r e he avily weigh t ed towards the prevention of new introductions and the educatio n of interest groups and the general public regard ing th eir ro le in mini m i zing th e spread and transpo r t of these species.



### Scope of the Aquatic Invasive Species Management Plan

Section 1204 of the Aquatic Nuisance Preven tion and Control Act of 1990 (am e nded as the National Invasive Species Act of 1996) specifically calls for states to develop com p rehensive Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Species Managem e nt Plans. This Act authorizes a 75:25 federal to state m a tch of funds required to ach iev e objectives and actions outlin ed in p l ans approved by the federal Aquatic Nuisance Spec ies Task Force (ANS Task Force, als o established by the 1990 Act). In developing this plan, the Massachusetts Aquatic Invasive Species W o rking Group has closely followed the Guidance for State and Interstate Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plans developed by the ANS Task Force (2000).

Managem e nt actions outlined in this docum ent are targeted at both m a rine and freshwater AIS. For the purposes of this plan, aquatic invasive species are defined as nonindigenous or cryptogen i c species that threaten the diversity or abundance of native species or the ecological stability and/or us es of infested waters (adapted from the Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990). The term aquatic refers to open w a ters of m a rine and freshwater environm ents as well as coastal and freshwater wetlands. (Note: In m a ny cases, legislation relevant to invasive species m a na ge ment uses alternate term inology for invasive species such as nuisance or exotic . When referencing progr am s established by various

2legis l ative e f f o rts in this docum ent, the term i nology used in each act or regulation has been

e t a ined. Th e Glossary in Section VI I provide s d e f i nition s f o r bolded ter m s.) r
While the authority and program s outlined in this plan are generally lim ited to the political boundaries of Massachusetts, it is recognized throughout that there is a need for interstate and international cooperation to prevent the introducti on and spread of AIS. In particular, this plan describes efforts to coor dinate with Northeastern US states, as well as bordering Canadian provinces, through the recently form ed Northeast Regional Panel of the Federal ANS Task F o rce.



### Process and Participation

Massachusetts established the Aquatic Invasi ve Species W o rking Group (the AIS W o rking Group) in the fall of 2000 to coordinate and enhance efforts for the prevention and

m a nage m e nt of AIS through the developm ent of t h is m a nagem e nt plan. The W o rking Group is m a de up of 18 representatives from 14 state and federal agencies, academ i c institutions, and a consulting group (Appendix A) and has worked to coordinate existing m a nagem e nt efforts, identify priority invasive speci es to target for prevention and control, and develop specific

m a nage m e nt objectives and actions.

Many W o rking Group mem b ers serve on additio n al comm ittees invo lved in invas i ve species

m a nage m e nt initiatives in Massachusetts a nd the region, including the Massachusetts Lakes and Ponds Watershed Action Strategy, the Silvio O. Conte National W ildlife Refuge Invasive Plant Contro l Initia tive, a nd the North east Re gional Panel of the ANS Tas k Force (each described below). Integration of these comm ittees into the AIS W o rking Group has ensured
that m a nagem e nt m easures outlined in this pl an represent a fully coordinated approach.

Public com m e nt during the developm ent of this docum ent has been an important component of the planning process. AIS W o rking Group m e mbers led public scoping m eetings in Metropolitan Boston, the North Shore, South Sh ore, Cape Cod and Islands, Central, and Western regions of Massachusetts. P a rticipan ts represented a range of organizations and interests and included conserva tion comm issioners, harborm a ster s, watershed associations, municipal representatives, i ndustry representatives, and ot hers. Scoping m e etings were successful in offering the W o rking Group a loca l perspective on AIS issues, and wherever possible, co mments received at these m eetings have been incorporated into the Managem e nt Objectives and Actions of Section IV. A su mm ar y of questions, comm ent s , and responses given at each public scoping m ee ting is included in Appendix B. A draft version of the AIS Plan was also posted on the Massachusetts Offi ce of Coastal Zone Managem e nt (CZM) web, and notice of a public comment period was published in the E n vironmental Monitor (Executive Office of Environm en tal Aff a irs, 200 2) soliciting f eedback on the draft Plan from all interested parties. T h e AIS W o rking Gr oup will con tinu e to inco rporate sugges t ions received through outreach efforts into future revisions of this Plan.



### Relationship to Existi ng Management Efforts

Currently, multip le in itia tives in Mas s achusetts a nd the North easte rn United State s are working to address AIS issues in the state and region. Several of these initiatives have been developed concurrently with this Massachusetts AIS Mana gem e nt Plan, underscoring the

3heightened awareness of AIS problem s and c onc erns in the region over the past year.
Mem b ers of the Massach usetts AIS Working Group are part of each of the initiatives described below. These existing and developing m a nage m e nt efforts have been beneficial to the developm ent of this plan by identifying n eeds within the region, state, and in local watersheds, m a ny of whi c h have been addresse d by the AIS Working Group in this docum e nt.

Northeast Regional Panel of the Federa l Aquatic Nuisa n ce Species Task Force

Section 1203 of the National Aquatic Nuisan ce Prevention and Control Act of 1990 directs the federal ANS Task Force to enco urage th e developm ent and use of regional panels to:

1) Identify priorities for each region w ith respect to aquatic nuisance species. 2) Make recomm endations to the Task Force regarding education, m onitoring (including inspection), prevention, and control of nuisance species. 3) Coordinate, whenever possible, other aquatic nuisance species program activities in each region. 4) Develop an em ergency response strategy fo r federal, state, an d local entities for

stemm i ng new invasions of aquatic nuisance species in the region. 5) Provide advice to public and private i ndividuals and entities concerning m e thods of preventing and controlling aquati c nuisance species infestations. 6) Subm it an annual report to the Task Fo rce describing activities within the region related to aquatic nuis ance species prevention, re search, and control.

Once for m ally recognized by the federal ANS Task Force, each regional panel becom e s eligible for lim ited funding for im ple m entation.

Until recently, regional p a nels ex isted only for th e Great Lak e s Region, the W e stern United States and the Gulf of Mexico. Recognizing the need for interstate and international cooperation on AIS issues in the Northeast, CZM and the A I S W o rking Group have taken the lead in form ing a No rtheast Regional Aqua tic Nuisance Species Panel ( t he Northeas t Pan e l). The No rtheas t Pane l will includ e sta t e, f e der a l and r e gio n al

governm e nt representatives, as well as non-gove rnm e nt organizations from the states of New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Mass achusetts, Verm ont, New Hampshire, and Maine, and the Canadian provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Quebec. The Northeast P a nel was recognized by the federal A N S Task Force in July of 2001, and developm ent of the first annual work plan is underway.

The Massachusetts Council on Inva sive Species

The Council on Invasive Species was esta blished in 1999 by EOEA to serve as a coordinating m echanism for the various i nvasive species m a nagem e nt activities undertaken by Massachusetts state agencies. The Council addresses bo th terrestrial and
AIS m a nagem e nt issues and is com p rise d of four m e m b er groups, including:

The Massachusetts Invasive Plant Group. •

4The Invertebrate Invasive s and Biocontrols Group. •

•

• The W ildlife and Plant Diseases Group.
The AIS W o rking Group.

All m e m b er groups of the Council will m eet period ically to update stakeholders on invasive species m a nagem e nt activities and coordinate any overlapping m a na gem e nt initia tiv es.

The Massachusetts Invasive Plant Group (MIPG)

A broad based coalition of state and federal governm e ntal agencies, MIP G for m ed under the le adersh ip of the Silv io O. Conte Refuge (below) in order to:

1) Share invasive plant inform ation am ong m e m b ers. 2) Educate the public and other interest groups about invasive plants and their control. 3) Prom ote native altern atives to thos e nonindigeno us species still b e ing used for various purposes in Massachusetts. 4) Prom ote research in the field of invasive plant managem e nt.

MIPG has drafted a standard definition and set of biologically based criteria upon which to objectively evaluate plants suspected to be invasive in the state. Existing data about these species are being g a thered to id entif y those that are currently invasive in Massachusetts and those that have the potential to becom e problem atic. Once the status is known, an action p l an will be dev e loped and ed ucation a l efforts will beg i n. MIPG will serve as an important ad visory com m ittee for state agen cies working to d e velop con t rol strategies an d identify i nvasive plant priorities.

The Massachusetts Invertebrate Invasives an d Biocontrols Group

The Invertebrate Invasives and Biocontrols Group is m a de up of representatives of each of the EOEA agencies, includ ing th e Depart m e nt of Environm ental Managem e nt (DEM), Departm e nt of Fisheries, W ildlif e, an d Environmental Law E n f o rcem ent (DFW ELE), Departm e nt of Environmental P r otection (DEP), Metropolitan District C o mm ission (MDC), Departm e nt of Food and Agriculture (DFA), and CZM. This group has m o st

recen tly focused on the Hem l ock Woolly Adelg i d ( Adelges tsugae ), which is docum ented in about one-third of Massachusetts cities and towns and threatens the state’s extensive
Eastern Hem l ock groves. The Invertebra te Invasives and Biocontrols Group has overseen the pilot introduction of the Japanese Lady Beetle ( Harmonia axyridis ) to control the adelgid. The group also evalua ted the safety of re leasing leaf-eating Galerucella beetles to control purple loosestrife in several Ma ssachusetts wetlands. Next tasks include developing a Biocontrols Releas e Protocol that prot ects ag ainst s e cond ary im pacts f r om inverteb ra tes in tention a lly intr oduced to control invasi ve species, and an Invertebrate Prevention Protocol for prev enting the natural sp read or accidental introduction of invasive invertebra tes such as the Asian Longhorn Beetle ( Anoplophora glabripennis ) and zeb ra mussel.

5The Massachusetts Wildlife and Plant Diseases Group

The W ildlife and Plant Diseases Group is m a de up of a s m all group of veterinarians and biologists conducting research and m onitoring of wildlife and plant diseases that are presently inf ecting flora and fauna in the state or pose the threat of introdu ction o r natu ral spread to Massachusetts. Representatives fr om Tuf t s University and the Massachus e tts Division of Fisheries and W ildlife’s Natura l Heritage and Endange red Sp ecies Prog ram lead this sm all network of sp ecialists undertaking research and m onitoring of wildlife and plant diseases. The parasite pf isteria that is affecting fish in Maryland, and the W e st Nile virus, a new danger to people in Massachusetts th at is also sh owing im pacts to the s t a t e’s avian species, are am ong the afflictions being studied and m o nitored by the group.

The Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge Invasive Plan t Control Initiat i ve

The Silvio O. Conte Nationa l Fish a nd W ildlif e Refuge has developed an Invasive P l ant Control In itiative in re sp onse to th e threat to na tural diversity posed by invasive plant species. This initia tive exam ines the prob lem of f

r eshwat er invasive plants from a regional perspective and identif i e s tasks that will enhan c e the capab ility within the region to ad dress id entif i ed issues.

In cooperation with a number of partners, the Ref uge obtained a grant from the National Fish and W ildlife Foundation to develop a strategic plan discuss i ng th e state of the issu e, ou tlin ing future actions for the Connecticut River W a tershed and Long Island Sound, and

recomm endi ng funding for high priority invasi ve plant control projects in 1998. The Connecticut River W a tershed/Long Island Sound Invasive P l ant Contro l Initiative Strategic Plan was completed and distributed in March of 1999. This plan identifies problem plants in the watershed, gives a detailed description of the efforts of agencies and o r ganization s working to m itigate the problem , and m a kes rec o mm endations f o r additional m a nagem e nt activ ities.

As part of the initiative, a pa rtnership of federal, state, m unicipal, business and non-profit groups formed to control water chestnut ( Trapa natans ), a new invader to the watershed.
Com ponents of the strategy include m echani cal harvesting of the source population and organizing volunteers to monitor water bodi es for satellite populations within the watershed, hand-pulling them when found.

The AIS W o rking Group has incorporated actions in the M a ss achusetts AIS Plan that address needs identified in the C onnecticut R i ve r W a tershed/Long Island Sound Strategic P l an including the developm ent of pr iority species lists

, educat ion of specific stakeholders regarding the invasive plants problem, and coordination of re sources within and across New England States. The AIS W o rking Group will c ontinue to work with pro ponents of the Invasive P l ant Control Initiative to ensure that managem e nt efforts in the Connecticut River Watershed are coordinated with state and regional initiatives.

6The Ne w England Invasive Plant Group (NIPGro)

In keeping with its aquatic inva sive plant m a nagem e nt priorities, the Silvio O. Conte Refuge has taken the lead in the esta blishm ent and adm i nistration of both MIPG (above) and the New England Invasive Plant Group (NIPGro). NIPGro is a networking link among the organizations and agencies invol ved with terrestrial and freshw ater aquatic invasive plant issues in the region. Priori ties of the group include:

1) Minim i zing new introdu ctions to the region by in stitu ting an early wa rnin g and response system

. 2) Using the NIPGro network to exchange inform a tion, share educational m a terials, identify research need s, and estab lis h links with researche r s. 3) Developing standardized criteria for creating prio rity sp ecies lists. 4) Coordinating control efforts.

Funding was recen tly g r anted by th e US Depa rtm e nt of Agr i culture to support th e developm ent of an Invas i ve Plan t Atlas of New England, which will be th e foundation of an early warning and response system for the regi on. The University of Connecticut will be

oversee ing the Atlas wor k, assis t ed b y the New England W ild Flower Society. The gra n t will also provide the salary f o r the NIPGro coor dinator from 2002-2005. Massachusetts and the Northeast R e gional Panel will work closely w ith NIPGro on various AIS m a nage m e nt issues, and, in particular, on the shari ng and organization of invasive species distribution inform ation.

The Massachusetts Lakes and Ponds Watershed Action Strategy

In the fall of 2000, the Massachusetts Secret ary of Environm e n tal Affairs assem b led a Blue Ribbon Comm ittee on Lakes an d Ponds (t he Comm ittee) to develop a Lakes and Ponds W a tershed Action Strategy for the Co mmonwealth. The Comm i ttee worked to develop a plan for the improvem e nt of lake and pond protection effo rts, and identified priority m a nagem e nt objectives, includi ng the support of lo cal lake and pond stewardship, the protection of biodiversity and habitat, and the estab lishm ent of an invasive species response team

.

Currently, th e Comm ittee is working to im plem ent the a c tion plan th roug h development of de m onstration projects, coordination with watershed groups and m uni cipalities, and enhancem ent of existing program areas such as the DEM Lakes and Ponds Program . The
AIS W o rking Group has worked clos ely with the Blue Ribbon Comm ittee to ensure that these efforts are coordinated, and that needs identified in the Lakes and Ponds W a tershed Action Strategy have been integrated into the Managem e nt Objectives and Actions section of this plan. Consequently, reco mmended activ ities an d im plem entation ef f o rts developed b y the Committee com p rise a sign if ic ant por tion o f f

r eshwater m a nagem e nt efforts outlined in Section IV of this plan.

The Guide to Lake and Pond Mana gement in Massachusetts

DEM and DEP are joint proponents of a Gene ral Environm e n tal Im pact Report (GEIR) on eutrophication and control of aquatic vegetation in the lakes and ponds of Massachus etts. Upon finalization of this re po rt, D E M and DEP will issu e a "Guide to

7Lake and Pond Managem e nt in Massachuset ts.” This guide will prov ide the nontechnical reader with the key inform a tion in the GEIR along with inform ation that will help citizens and town conservation commissi ons m o re clearly understand options for lake m a nagem e nt, including control tec hniques for both native and nonindigenous aquatic wee d s. The guid e will prov id e the bas i s f o r m o re inf o rm ed and consisten t decisions by m unici palities on lake and pond m a nage m e nt projects through training

program s for conserv a tion commissioners. A dditionally the guide will lay the foundation
for m a ny of the lakes and ponds education and training initiati ves outlined in Section IV.

8

### II. Existing Authorities and Programs

Relevant program s that currently address the AIS problem at th e federal, regional, and state level are described briefly in the following para graphs with emphasis on those that have been activ e in Massachusetts and are ne ce ssary to f a c i lita te the im plem entation of this plan. W h ere possible, the AIS W o rking Group has developed the m a nagem e nt actions outlin ed in Section IV based on expansion of the capabilities of thes e existing program s , part icularly at th e sta t e and regional level.



### Federal Authorities

At the federal level, no single agency has aut hority over the m a nagem e nt of AIS. Rather, multiple age n cies hav e d e veloped in vasive spe c ie s program s, large l y in re action to sev e re AIS issues. Effective invasive species m a nagem e nt in the United States will require federal agencies to expand existing efforts to deter nonindigenous species in troductions through the oversight of international and interstate trade and commerce and associated transpo r t v ectors such as comm ercial ship ping and the trade of organism s via m a il order and the Internet (Section III).

The federal governm e nt first responded to the invasive species issue in reaction to the devastating econom ic and ecological im pacts of the zebra m u ssel intr oduction to the G r eat Lakes. The Nonindigenous Aquatic Nu isance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (NANPCA, PL 101-646), am ended a nd broadened in scope as the National Invasive Species Act of 1996, calls for the developm ent of stat e aquatic nuisance spec ies m a nage m e nt plans and outlines the following objectives (Section 1002):

1) To prevent f u rther unintentional intr oductions of nonindigenous aquatic species. 2) To coordinate federally funded rese arch, control efforts and infor m ation dissem i nation. 3) To develop and carry out environm e n tally sound control m e thods to prevent, m onitor, and control unintentional introductions. 4) To understand and m i nim i ze ecological dam a ge. 5) To establish a program of research an d technology development to assist state

governm e nts.

Section 1201 of NANPCA establishes the fede ral interagency ANS Tas k Force. The ANS Task Force is charged with coordinating federa l aquatic nuisance species m a nage m e nt efforts with the ef f o rts of the pr ivat e sector and other North Am eri can interests. The ANS Task Force is resp onsible f o r initiating res earch p r ogr am s, planning initiatives, and policy direction for the prevention, detection and m o nitoring, a nd control of aquatic nuisance species, and operates through regional panels as well as issue-specific working groups that address particularly problem atic invaders.

An addition a l elem ent of NANPCA is the e s tab l ishm ent of ballas t m a nagem e nt regulations. Under Section 1101 of the Act, th e US Secretary of Transportati on is charged with developing

m a ndatory ballast w a ter guidelines for the Great Lake s (and later for the upper Hudson River). This task was delegated to and com p leted by the US Coast Guard

, the lead f e deral

9agency for ballast water m a nage m e nt issues. Amendm ents to NANPCA i n 1996 directed the Secretary to extend ballast water m a nagem e nt re gulations to the rem a inder of US waters. Developed and im ple m e n ted by the Coast Guar d in July of 1999, the Voluntary National Guidelines apply to waters outside of the Gr eat L a kes Ecosystem

. This voluntary program consists of a suite of ballast water m a nagem e nt (BW M ) guidelines, and includes a requirem e nt that all vessels en tering US waters from outside the Exclusive Econom ic Zone file a BW M report. A third Coast G u ard re lated elem ent of the 1996 am e n dm ents was the publication of voluntary guidelines aim e d at controlling the spread of AIS through recreational activities (i.e., boating, f i shing, SC UBA diving, etc.) The C o ast Guard worked with the ANS Task Force to com p lete these guidelines in Decem ber of 2000.

Federal program s dealing with nonindigenous sp ecies that existed prio r to the passage of NANPCA are la rgely related to inte r s tate and in te rnational transport of known pest plants and
anim als and the protection of valuable horticult ural, aquacultural, or endangered species. These laws include:

The Lacey Act of 1900 (and amendments): Th e Lacey Act estab lishe s a perm itting process adm i nistered by the US Fish and W ildlif e Service reg u lating the importation and transpo r t of verteb rates, m o llusks, a nd crus tacea that are "inju r ious to hum a n beings, to the interests of agricu ltu re, horticultu re, f o rest ry, or to wildlife or the wildlif e r e so urces of the United Sta t e s .” Th e Secretary of the Interior m a intains the Injurious Species L i st. •

•

•

• The Federal Seed Act of 1939 (and amendments): This act prohibits th e im portation of seeds of unknown type and origin by ensu ring the purity and prope r labeling of seed
im ports. The Endangered Species Act of 19 73 (and amendments): The Endangered Species Act can be u s ed to au tho r ize the erad ication or co ntrol of AIS in the case that a listed species is th reatened by the i nvader' s presence or spread. The Plant Protection Act of 2000 (amending the Noxious Weed Act of 1974). The Plant Protec tion Act g i v e s the US Departm e nt of Agriculture (USDA) Anim al and Plant Health Inspection Serv ice (APHIS) the authority to pro h ibit the im port and inte rsta te tra n sport of sp ecies includ ed on the Noxious W e e d List developed by the USDA. In cooperation with state agri cultural departm e nts, APHIS annually designa tes p r ior ity ag ric u ltur a l pes t s p ecies f o r an nual in tensive m onitoring ef f o rts.

The m o st recent inv a siv e species in itiative dev e l oped at th e federal level cam e in February of 1999 with Executive Order 13112. This order es tablishes the National Invasive Species Council, a federal interagency organization ch arged with the biennial developm ent of a National Invasive Species Managem e nt Plan.



### Federal Progr ams an d Activities

In addition to the regulations outlined in the above legislation, severa l go vernm e nt agencies have recognized the severity of the invasive species problem

, and have adopted the

m a nage m e nt and control of invasive sp ecies as priority p r ogram s areas.

10The US Fish and Wildlife Serv ice (USFWS)

The USFWS has trad itionally be en the le ad in dealing with invasive species at the federal level and is co-chair of the federal A N S Task Force. Thus, the USFWS provides technical assis t ance to states in developi ng invasive species control plan s. The USFW S has been active in AIS m a na gem e nt activities in Massachusetts through the S ilvio O. Conte National W ildlife Refuge Invasive Plant Contro l Initia tive and con t rol ef f o rts at other refuges within Massachus etts. In add i tion to thes e a c tiv ities, th e USFWS adm i nisters grants that can be used for invasive species m a nagem e nt through th e W i ldlife Restoration Program (Appendix C).

The US Geological Survey (USGS)

The USGS has acknowledged its role in nonindige nous species m a nage m e nt in a W h ite Paper on Invasive Species, in which th e goal of developing new strategies for the prevention, early detection, and prom pt eradication of new invaders is identified. The US GS further identifies inform ation m a nage m e nt and docum e n tation of i nvasions as a priority for the agency. In keeping with this objective, the US GS has deve loped and mainta ins an e x tensiv e, sp atia lly referenced d a tabase of nonindigenou s speci es, which is accessible v i a th e Intern et (http://nas.er.usgs.gov/).

The US Department o f Agriculture (USDA)

Through the APHIS Cooperative Agricultural Pest Survey (C APS), the USDA works with state agricultural agencies to m onitor for ag ricultural pests and noxious weeds. Individual

state m onitoring program s are directed by a st ate survey committee, which is m a de up of

repres entatives from state agencies and scien tif ic institutions. Each year, the state su rvey

comm ittee reviews an APHIS recomm ended list of potential pests for survey (the Noxious Weed List), and chooses one or m o re for annua l surveillance efforts. Target species m a y include weeds, plant diseases, insects, and othe r invertebrates. APHI S also cooperates with the US Custom s Service to lim it the im port of sp ecified plant pests and th eir hos ts in to the country.

Massachusetts Institu t e of Technol ogy (MIT) Sea Grant College Program

The National Sea Grant College Program was es ta blished in 1966 to foster research, outreach, and education for the promotion of sustainable developm ent of coastal regions. The Program has played an active role in re search on invasive species issues in the United States through projects such as the National Aquatic Nu isance Species Clearinghouse, the Zebra Mussel Training Initiative, and a com p etitive grant pr og ra m f o r invasive species re search and outreach projects.

MIT Sea Grant has been at the fo refront of m a rine invasive sp ecies research and m a nagem e nt in Massachu s etts. MIT Sea Grant sp onsored the First Inte rna tiona l Conference on Marine Bioinvasions in 1999. In the summ e r of 2000, MIT Sea Grant worked with Massachusetts state agencies and organizations to conduct a Rapid Assessment Survey of Invasive S p ecies on floating docks and piers along the Massachuset ts and Rhode Island Coast. The survey docum ented the presence and distribution of 24 nonindigenous and 49 cryptogenic species, developing som e of the baseline inform ati on necessary to designate invasive species

11m a nage m e nt priorities in New England m a rine system s. This program also heightened

awareness o f AIS threats to Massach use tts and generated m o m e ntum towards the developm ent of this plan.



### State A u th orities and Programs

To date, Massachusetts AIS m a nagem e nt activi ties have been dom i nated by the m a nagem e nt of aquatic invasive plant species in lakes and ponds. Otherwise, AIS m a nagem e nt efforts in Massachusetts have included program s to pr otect native shellfish resources and m a nage agricu ltu ral pests ( l arg e ly in te rres t r i al envir onments). Recently, the need to expand existing

program s in freshwater system s and develop m a rine program areas ha s been recognized. Through the coordinating efforts and action strategies outlined in this docum e nt, and through the coordinating efforts of the Massachuset ts Council on Invasive Species and m e m b er groups, existing program areas will be expande d to m o re comprehensively address AIS priorities in Massachusetts. The following is an o v erview of the current ro les of Massachusetts agencies and organizations i nvolved in invasive species m a nagem e nt.

Departmen t of Environmental Manageme nt (DEM) Lakes and Ponds Program

DEM is the prim ary land m a nagem e nt and natu ral resou r ce p l anning ag ency, as well as the largest landholder in Massachus etts. Under MGL c.21 §37, DEM is required to establish an aquatic nuisance control program that m u st:

1) Receive and respond to aquatic invader com p laints. 2) W o rk with municipalities, loca l in te rest organizations, and agencies of the state to develop long-range program s regard ing aquatic nuisance controls. 3) Work with federal, state and local governm e nts to obtain funding for aquatic nuisance control program s

. 4) Adm i nister an aquatic n u isance sp ecies gran ts program

.

The aquatic nuisance sp ecies con t ro l program is geared towards freshwater species an d is adm i nistered by the DEM Lakes and Ponds Program . The program m a nages a variety of lake
im prove m e nt projects as well as providing tec hnical assistance, education, and outreach to Massachusetts lake and pond m a nagers. W h ile the aquatic nuisance control program has never been directly funded, DEM has dedicate d resources to the a bove tasks through the Lakes and Ponds Program and, m o re recen tly, th rough the Lakes and Ponds W a tershed Action Strategy (though full compliance with the Act is not possible without additional funding). DEM also adm i nisters the Lakes and Ponds Gr ant Awards Program , whi c h provides funds for the control o f incipien t a quatic invas i ve plant infestations (Appendix C).

Departmen t of Enviro nmental Pr otection (DEP)

DEP has three m a in program areas relevant to the m a nage m e nt of AIS:

1) Monitoring and Assessm e nt of Surface W a te rs: DEP, through its Divisio n of W a tershed Managem e nt, W a tershed Planning Program

, has had an active lake m onitoring and

assessm ent program for 27 years (MGL c.21 §27( 8)). These activities have included the identification of aquatic macrophyte s , both native and nonindig enous. Monitoring and

12assessm ent work conducted by the Watershed P l anning Program leads to the developm ent of assessm e n t reports that identify impaired waters, including lakes im pa ired by nonnative m acrophytes, and recomm end activ ities to rem e dy the im pair m e nts.

2) Adm i nistration of the Herbicide Licens e Program : The W a tershed Planning Program approves aquatic herbicide application proj ects for native or non-native plants on individual w a ter bodies through its L i censes to Apply Chem i cals for the Control of Nuisance Aquatic Vegetation (Herbicide Licens es; MGL c.111 §5E). At present, DE P has
lim ited staf f tim e dedicated to the He rbic ide Licensing Program and is seeking additional resources to provide for more thorough review of licenses and m onitoring of effectivenes s.

3) Adm i nistration of the W e tland s Protection Ac t: Th e DEP Wetland and Waterways Program adm i nisters an d enforces the Ma ssachusetts W e tlands Protection Act (MGL c.131 §40). Under this act, a ny activity that occu rs within the 100-foot wetland buffer, includ ing th e rem oval or contro l of vegeta ti on or other org a nism s, must be perm itted by DEP and town conservation comm issions (also set up by the act). Conservation

comm issions m a y also govern practices and ac tivities within the 100-foot jurisdictional boundary through the passage of local ordinances.

Departmen t of Food and Agriculture (DFA)

DFA is responsible for the m onitoring and regula tion of plant im ports to Massachusetts. DFA works closely with the U S DA to lim i t introducti ons of (largely agri cultural) plant pests through the following program areas (MGL 128:16-31):

1) The DFA Pesticide Bureau adm i nisters all state and federal regulat ions re lated to the use of pesticides, including those used in aquatic environm ents. DFA m u s t approve and register all pesticides before they can be licensed by DEP for application in Massachusetts. 2) DFA funds and is involved with Res earch and De m onstration program s at the University of Massachusetts concerning Inte grated Pest Managem e nt. While m o st of these research initiatives are bas e d in agricu ltu re , there is potentia l f o r the s e ef f o rts to consider aquatic environm ents. Further, DFA adm i nisters the Gro-Enviro Technology Grant Program , which m a y be used to fund projects related to the control of AIS (Appendix C). 3) The Bureau of Plant Ind u stries, in co operation with USDA’s APHIS, approves perm its to allow nonindigenous organism s into the st ate. DFA m a int a in s the state Noxious Weeds List, which identifies species prohibi ted for im port and sale in Massachusetts. State surveys are run thr ough CAPS (see federal program s: USDA) in cooperation with the University of Massachusetts. MG L c.128 §20A prohibits the deliberate sale

or m ove m e nt of water chestnut ( Trapa natans ) plants or propagules. 4) DFA conducts annual inspections of all nu rseries and water garden suppliers, which include screening for prohibi ted non-indigenous plants, plan t pests, and noxious weed species.

13DFA has general responsibility for pet shop licensing and oversight (with the exception of “fish only” pet shops) and prom otion and m a rketing of the aquaculture industry and its products. D F A provides technical assistan ce for the aquaculture industry (perm it developm ent, operations, etc.) and adm i nist ers the Massach usetts Aquacultu re Gran ts Program

.

Division of Marine Fis h eries (DMF)

Under MGL chapter 130 (various sections), DMF is given the authority to regulate the
sources of s h ellf ish f o r a quacultu re. The goal of this legis l ation and the r e sulting per m itting

program is to protect native shellfish res ources from possible introdu ctions of non-endem i c diseases, parasites, predators, a nd to protec t the g e netic integr ity of loca l s h ellf ish reso urces. A perm it is required to “...plant, transplant, or introduce for the purposes of transplanting seed or adult oysters, into any waters or into any shellf ish are a s within the Commonwealth. ” DMF has establish e d guidelines for acceptab l e sh e llfish s eed sources, and is able to regulate the transport of any species designated as a threat to these resources (322 C M R).

Massachuse tts Office o f Coastal Z o ne Management (CZ M )

CZM has 27 federally approved coastal policie s that guide the im ple m entation of its

program . These policies, re la ting to water qua lity, habita t, protected areas, coastal hazards, po rt and harbo r infrastru c tu re, public access, energy, ocean resources and growth m a nagem e nt, are all backed by the lega l authority of sister state agencies. By virtue of having a federally approved coas tal plan, CZM has "federal consistency" jurisdiction over projects located in the state coas tal zon e that are either direct federal actions, receive federal funds, or require fe deral perm its. Federal consistency review gives CZM the authority to ensure that all projects under its jurisd iction are consistent with state C Z M policies. Although CZM polic ies do not directly address AIS, Ocean
Resources P o licy #1 states am ong its guide lines for aquaculture siting, "U tilize technolog ies and species which are co mpatible with local cond itions and d o not threaten the biological diversity of our m a rine waters ." CZM does not have independent authority to regulate any aspect of the AIS problem

.

CZM has identified AIS as a priority for acti on, both in its recent five-year Section 309
Assessm ent and Stra tegy and in its re cent gr ant a pplica tion to the Nation a l Oceanic an d
At m o spheric Adm i nistration (NOAA). CZM was a co-sponsor of the 2000 Rapid
Assessm ent Survey of Invasive Species in co astal Massachusetts and has led efforts to develop the AIS Managem e nt Plan. In a ddition, CZM initiated the form a tion of the Northeast R e gional Panel of the ANS Task Force.

Massachusetts Bays National Estu ary Program (MBP)

MBP has identif ied hab i tat p r otec tio n, which inc l udes addressing invasive species issues, as
an im portant action item in its Com p rehensive Conservation and Managem e nt Plan (CCMP).
Recent rev i s i ons to th e CCMP have elevated th e m a nagem e nt of invasi ve species to a top priority action item

. MBP has worked cooperative ly with other state ag encies to conduct the 2000 Rapid Assessm ent Survey of Invasive Sp ecies in coastal waters and has provided financial support for the developm en t of the AIS Management Plan.

14Division of Fisheries a nd Wildlif e (DFW)

DFW is charged by law to conserve, m a inta in, and protect the natural and aesthetic qualities of the environm ent for the benefit and enjoym ent of the people (MGL chapters 21, 131, and 131A). Authority is shared with the USFWS for m i gratory birds, anadrom ous fish (in fresh water), and federa lly threaten ed an d endangered species. D F W regulations, which are designed, in part, to he lp pr event the establishm ent of nonindigneous vertebrate species, re late to the following issues:

Vertebrate Importatio n: DFW has enacted regulation s that prohibit th e im portation of fish, am phibians, reptiles, birds, and m a mm als into the Commonwealth without an
im portation perm it (321 CMR 2.15 (6)).

Fish Liberation: Release of live fish or spawn re quires both a Liberation Perm it and a Health Certificate (321 CMR 2.15(5)) that ensure s that fish have been tested for certain pathogens, both of which are issued by the Departm e nt of Fish, W ildlife, and Environm ental Law Enforcem ent (par ent ag ency of DFW and DMF).

Fish Transport: Transport of any live fish (excep t lega l baitf i sh) witho u t a perm it is prohibited and m onitored by the DFW (321 CM R 2.15(6)).

Bait Fish Sale and Har v est: DFW designates fish species that can be harvested for both personal and commercial uses (321 C M R 4.01) as well as those that are allowed for
im port and areas e ligib le f o r baitf ish harv est. Species that m a y be im ported for commercial sale include eight species commonly found in Massachusetts waters.

Aquaculture: DFW issues licenses f o r the propagation and culture of fish species. Aquaculture operations are divided into clas ses based on the types of fish cultured and sold. The type of license is dependent larg ely on the native range of the species he ld at each facility (321 CMR 4.09(4).

Aquarium Fish Sale: DFW exe m pts all aquarium fish (defined as thos e species that

cannot surv ive year-roun d in a wild environm ent above 30 degrees north latitud e ) except several species whose introduc tion is of particular con cern in Massachusetts 321 CMR 9.01(3). These fish species have been included in the priority species section of this plan (Section III).

DFW also addresses adv e rse im pacts from the establishm ent of invasive species through adm i nistration and enforcem ent of the Massachu s etts Endang ered Species Act (MGL c.131A; 321 CMR 10.00) and by providing co mm ents to conservation commissions under the Wetlands P r otection Act (MGL c.131 §40; CMR 10.00).

Finally, DF W has several non-regulatory prog ram areas relating to invasive species

m a nage m e nt . These efforts include: 1) id entifying the problem species in natura l ecosystem s through biological surveys; 2) educating the public through publications about invasive species; 3) m a intaining th e Natural Heritage & Endangered Species

15Program ’s Biological Conservation Database, w h ich iden tif ies habitats threaten ed b y invasive species; and 4) actively rem oving invasive species through ongoing land

m a nage m e nt activities and the Habitat Restoration Program

.

Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport)

Massport is an independent, public authorit y that m a nages, prom otes and develops Massachusetts airports, the Port of Boston, a nd portions of the regional transportation infrastructure. The Maritim e Departm e nt operates and leases m a jor shipping term inals and related port facilities in Boston Harbor, and plays a role in supporting and prom oting the Port of Boston as a whole. W h ile Massp ort has no program areas dir e ctly related to invasive species m a nagem e nt, the Maritim e Departm e nt participates in various interagency working groups to address por t-related environm ental issues, including ballast water m a nagem e nt, and engages in regu lar outreach and education efforts with the shipping co mmunity in rela tion to th ese issu es.



### I n t e r n a t i o n a l A g r e e m e n t s

W h ile inte rn ationa l orga nizat ions have lim ited authority in the United States and countries worldwide, organizations such as the International Maritim e Organization (below) have taken a lead role in devel oping policies and guidelines relating to international trade and comm erce. Clearl y, invasive species m a nage m e nt is an inte rnational issue, and lim iting uncontrolled glo b al transpor t of AIS will requir e some reliance on these agencies to shape and im ple m e n t m a nage ment strategies.

The International Ma r i time Orga ni z a tion (I MO)

The IMO was estab l ished in 1948 to address s a fety and pollution m itigation m e asures for the international shipping industry. The United Stat es plays a leadership role on the Marine Environm ent Protection Comm ittee (MEPC), which is com p rised of all 161 Mem b er States, 37 Intergovernm ental Organizations, and 61 Non- Governm e nt al Organizations. The MEPC is

em powered to consider any m a tter within th e scop e of the IM O concerned with preven tion and control of pollution from sh ips, including ballast water m a nagem e nt and the transport of
AIS. IMO Assem b ly Resolution A.868(2) was a dopted in 1993 and establishes international guidelines for the control of ballast water, wh ich have served as a m odel for ballast water

m a nage m e nt in m a ny countries.

The Gulf of Maine Council on th e Marine Environment (GOMC)

GOMC was created in 1989 by the g overnors and prem iers of the ju risdictions that border the Gulf of Maine. The Council’s m i ssion is “to m a intain and enhance environm ental quality in the Gulf of Maine and to allow f o r s u stai nable resource use by existing and future generations...” Through GOMC, Massachusetts , New Hampshire, Maine, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, six federal environm ental agen cies, and five non-governm e nt representatives work togeth er to pro t ec t their shared resources. GOMC develops action plans that are largely
im plem ented by the m e mber agencies.

16W h ile GOMC has no reg u lato ry auth ority, it is the only binational environm ental organization in this reg i o n that regula r ly works to gether on common problem s and, as a result, is in a key position to facilitate inte rstate and internationa l coordination on AIS issues in the region. As such, GOMC has been s e lected to s e rve as th e ho st agency fo r the North e ast Regional Panel of the Federal ANS Task Force. GOMC will pr ovide adm i nistrative an d logistical s upport, and will p l ay an im portant role in raising public awareness an d preparing the Gulf of Maine region to address AIS issues.



### Legislative Efforts

Massachus etts Senate Bill no. 1071 (introduced b y Senator Su san Fargo) o u tlin es an A c t that would expand DEM’s current aquatic i nvasive control efforts to include:

1) One full time program coordinator. 2) A com p rehensive aquatic exotic species m onitoring program

. 3) Developm ent of a com p r e hensive aq uatic nu isan ce species d a tabas e

. 4) A public education program

. 5) An addition a l gran t prog ram funding pub lic and non-public exotic, aqu a tic plant

contro l projects, as well as research by academ ic institutions into new co ntrol technologies. 6) Maintenance of a com p r e hensive list of aquatic invasive plants. 7) Prohibition of the transpor t of lis ted species to be en forced by the Massachusetts Environm ental Police.

Many of the item s addressed through the bill ha ve been identified as needs in the AIS Managem e nt Plan, and its passage w ould grea tly benef it im plem entation of m a jor

com ponents by providing funding and authority for freshwater AIS m a nagem e nt efforts. The
AIS W o rking Group will carefully m onitor the progress of this bill and make approp riate

am endm ents to this plan based on the outcom e (s ee also Sec tio n IV; Objective 8: Leg i slation )

.

17

### III. Problems and Concerns

The problem of aquatic invasions poses uni que challenges to m a nagers of aquatic system s as well as those developing policy a ffecting aquatic environm ents. Unlike other sources of pollution, established populations of aquatic invaders are se lf-sustaining. As a result, resources m u st be devoted to both prevention of new introductions and to the control of existing populations of invaders. The introducti on of only a few organism s or, in the case of aquatic plants and algae , a fraction of an organism , can result in the infestation of a water body, watershed, or an entire biogeographic region

. These introductions can occur through any num b er of transport vectors, further com p licating preventativ e m easures. The following section highlights som e of th e major im pacts of past introductions, identifies priority pathways by which these species m a y have been
im ported, and identifies established and thre atening species of gr eates t concern to th e Commonwe a lth. The discussion and identificat ion of the m a j o r problem s and concerns outlin ed below have served as the fo undation for the develop m ent of detailed Managem e nt Objectives and Actions outlin ed in S ection IV.



### Aquatic Invasive Species Impacts

Massachus etts currently faces a variety of i m pacts from aquatic invaders in both fresh and coastal waters, which can have significan t an d lasting im pacts on the Massachusetts

econom y. Current im pacts from AIS generally include:

Reduced diversity of native plants and anim als. •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• Im pair m e nt of recreational uses su ch as swimm i ng, boating, and fishing. Degradation of water quality. Degradation of wildlif e habita t. Increased threats to public health and safety.
Di m i nished property values. Declines in fin and shellfish populations.
Loss of coastal infrastructure due to habits of fouling and boring organism s. Local and com p lete extinction of rare and endangered species.

In addition to AIS im pac t s already experi en ced in Massachus etts, th e effects of encroach ing species m u st also b e con s idered when developing m a nagem e nt priorities.
For exam ple, Massachusetts has yet to be si gnificantly im pacted by fouling invertebrates such as the zebra m u ssel or Asian clam ( Corbicula fluminea ) in freshwater system s. However, if introduced, these species could have dram atic impacts on water intakes, power generation, and w a stewater treatm ent facilities.



### Manageme nt Priorities

Targeted strategies will be necessary to preven t n e w introductions and th e spread of established AIS populations. The Massachus etts AIS W o rking Group has developed a list of transport vectors that have the greatest po te ntia l to r e sult in f u rthe rin g the AIS problem , as well as a list of priority species for m a nagem e nt. While the list of priority

18transport vectors has becom e som e what st andardized nationwide, the pathways of introdu ction are des c rib e d below in the contex t o f Massachus etts activitie s. Identif i e d species include both established invaders and those not yet docum e nted in Massachusetts but which have had significant im pa cts elsewher e. Prior ity tr anspor t vectors and species have been designated based on the m o st curr ent research in th e region (Appendix D) and will be updated as new infor m ation becom e s availab l e.

In addition to the transport and priority sp ecies described below, the AIS Working Group has identified the protection of endangered, threatened, or ot h e rwise rare a quatic species or aquatic ecosystem s from encroachm e nt by invasive organism s as a priority for

m a nage m e nt in Massachusetts. These con cerns must be addressed through the designation of priority species and habitats, and on-site m a nage m e nt of aquatic invaders.

T r a n s p o r t V e c t o r s
To date, the shipping industry has dom i nate d the field of AIS research in the United States. Although Massachusetts recognizes the threat from ba llast water discharge, ports in the Commonwealth m a y receive relatively li ttle ballast w a ter as com p ared to o t her

m a jor ports in the US due to local trade patt erns (Sm ith et al., 1999) . Massachusetts has recognized the need to evaluate a variety of tr ansport vectors to expl ain the prevalence of invaders in the region. A coa lition of scientists from MIT Sea Grant, William s College, Northeastern University, and Sm ith College ar e working to assess th e risk of introduction through a variety of potential pathways including seafood co mpanies, aq uacultu re facilities, bait shops, pet stor es, public aquaria, marine re search facilities, and wetland

resto r ation e fforts (The New England Transport Vector Study, Sm ith et al., 1999). T h e research team has developed a database of com p anies and organizations involved in the transport and trade of both native and noni ndigenous organism s and distributed a survey to industry representatives to determ in e the type, quantity, and frequency of nonindigenous species imports and exports. Th e survey also inquired about the industry specific handling techniques that could result in AIS introdu ctions. Onc e com p leted, the
AIS W o rking Group will reevaluate the rela tive regional im portance of the transport vectors described below and m a ke the appropriate adapta tion s to the actio ns identif i ed f

o r each.

Commercial Shipping

Comm ercial shipping is often considered the m o s t im porta nt m e ans of unintentional introdu ction s of AIS to coasta l and es tuar ine wate rs of the United Sta t es an d worldwide (Thresher, 2000). The steady rise of global com m e rce, increased shipping activities, and shorter transport tim e s suggest that the thre at of introductions th rough this pathway is likely increasing. The AIS W o rking Group has identified ballast wate r discharge and hull fouling as high priorities fo r m a nagem e nt in this plan.

Ballast Water: Shipp i ng vessels commonly f ill a nd re le ase b a lla st tanks with seawater
from harbors as a m eans of stabilizing loads. Res earch clearly indica tes that live m a rine organism s ranging from plankton to adult f i sh a r e regularly transported and released via this pathway (Cohen and Carlton, 1995). US Coast Guard regulations recommending

19ballast water exchange at sea are currently voluntary. However, low compliance with these gu idelines will like l y resu lt in a trans i tion to the ins t allation of m a ndatory ba lla st

water m a nagem e nt guidelines nation-wide.

A recent Co ast Guard/M a ssport stud y of ba llast water m a nagem e nt practices in Massachusetts suggests that ballast water di scharge does occur in Massachusetts, but is likely m i nim a l in com p arison to other large US ports (Burke, 2001). However, this study is based on lim ited ballast water m a nagem e nt reporting, and should be revisited as m o re records b eco m e available.

Concern over new AIS introductions to Massach usetts through ballast w a ter discharge,
lim ited knowledge of current ballast water practices, and questions regarding the effectivenes s of ballas t water exch a nge point to the following needs:

Further assessm ent of the com p liance w ith voluntary US Coast Guard ballast water exchange guidelines am ong ve ssels using Massachusetts ports. •

•

•

•

• Evaluation of additional needs for ma ndatory b a llast wa ter gu idelines. Developm ent and evaluation of additional ballast water treatm ent technologies, both on-board, and dockside.
Risk assessm e nts of threats posed b y different shipping facilities in Massachusetts.
Increased awareness of the AIS issu e to the ship ping comm unity.

Hull fou lin g: Hull fouling m a y rival ballast water discharge as the leading historical cause of harmful AIS introductions (Threshe r, 2000). Organism s with sedentary life history stag es can attach them selves to th e hulls of comm ercial vessels or becom e entangled in subm erged ship com p onents. Thes e organism s can surviv e for extended periods on vessels of any size and be introdu ced through dislodging, disentanglem ent, or by spawning in the ports to which they are transported.

Increased awareness by the comm er cial sh ipping industry of the threats posed by transpo r ted f ouling org a n i sm s will be nece ssary to lim it introd uctions thro ugh this pathway. In addition, research into envir onm entally safe and effective antifouling

m e thods will be necessary as trad itio nal tribut y l tin (TBT) antifouling agen ts are g r adually phased out in m a ny countries worldwide.

Recreation al Boating

Lakes, ponds, and coastal waters of Massachus etts provide recreati onal opportunities for a large population of boaters. Th e transportation of boats and their trailers between water bodies presents a risk of introduction th rough hull fouling, entanglem ent, and water discharge from bilge pumps and bait buckets (Helquist, 2001; Thresher, 2000). The use of recreational boats for fishing poses the a dditional risk of the release of imported bait species or species that serve as hos ts for nonindigenous organism s.

Currently, Massachusetts DEM and DFWELE P ublic Access Boards educate boaters regarding AIS transport via this pathway through signage posted at m a ny boat ram p s

20across the state. Extension of this program to include clear labeling of AIS infested waters would further reduce the risk of the tr ansport of established invaders and has been identified as a m a nage ment objective in th e AIS Managem e nt Plan. Additional needs include providing public facili ties for cleaning of vegetative m a terials attached to boats and boat trailers.

Bait Industry/Recreational Fishin g
The shipm e nt of live organism s into the state for use as bait m a y serve as pathways of introduction through their releas e (fish or invertebrates). Packing m a terials are often

com p rised of plant or algal m a tter and c ould harbor additional organism s. DFW regulates the culture, im port, harvest and sale of fish species sold as bait. However the sources of invertebrate imports to Massac husetts for recreationa l fishing purposes are largely unknown. Massachusetts has lim ited authority to contro l the im port of invertebrates. The AIS Working Group will ev aluate the reg u lato ry need s for m i nim i zing the th reats from introduction via this pathwa y. In addition, DMF and CZM will take the lead in developing and distributing guidance m a terials for the proper disposal of unused bait and packing m a terials.

Seafood Import and Sale

The im port, sale, and distribution of live a nd fresh seafood is a historically im portant

com ponent of the Massachusetts econom y. Processing and sale of live fin and shellfish constitute a risk of AIS in troduction through inten tional or unintenti onal release of live organism s, parasites , and pathogens. Specific seafood related pathways of introduction include :

Shellfish waste disposal: Shells and other unw anted m a terials discarded following shellfish processing (shucking) m i ght harbor shellfish pathogens or live epiphytes

. Disposal of this m a terial in or near a water body could result in unwanted introductions as well as other types of water quality im pair m e nt.

Bivalve w e t storage: H o lding of shellfish in flow-through system s subjects the surrounding surface waters to pathog ens and ot her organsism that m a y be contain e d in discharged waters. Packing and tra n sport of sh ellf ish in alg a l or p l ant m a ter i al also p o ses the risk of introductions through the dispersal of packing m a terials.

Creation of new fisheries: Several introductions of aquatic invaders, such as the Chinese

m itten crab ( Eriocheir sinensis ), m a y have resulted from the intentional re lease of spec ies that con s titu te comm ercially va luable f i sheries in other coun tr ies (W hitlatch et a l ., 19 95). Seafood suppliers and commercia l and recreational fishers, unaware of detrim ental
im pacts resulting from their in troduction, m a y be tem p ted to release these species into local aquatic system s to establish a self-sus taining population that can be harvested for

consum ption, pointing to the need f o r additi onal educational efforts specific to this pathway.

21A q u a c u l t u r e
Like the seafood industry, aquaculture is an im portant sector of the Massachusetts

econom y and will likely see sign ificant growth du e to increas ing constrain t s to wild fis h harvests in the United States and worldwid e (CZ M , 1995). While intensive culture of both finfish and shellfish reduces environm en tal impacts resulting from the harvest of wild stocks, concerns related to water qual ity im pairm e nt, growth and distribution of pathogens, escape of nonindigenous species, a nd genetic dilution i ndicate the need for careful planning for this industry. T h e fo llowing are exam ples of m echanism s for nonindigenous species introducti ons through intensive aquaculture operations.

Shellfish seed import: Shellfish seed are commonly grow n in hatcheries and im ported to Massachusetts for use in shellfish culture ope ratio n s. W h ile DMF carefully regulates the sources of seed for this i ndustry, there is the potential for the im port of shellfish pathogens and other organism s associated with shellfish, such as boring organism s, from out of state. Enhanced culture of local s eed stocks in Massachus etts, and an enhanced capacity to identif y and m a nage shellf ish dise ase s will be n e c e ssary to m i nim i ze the loss of shellfish due to these threats.

Use of cultch: Several s h ellf ish sp ec ies cu ltur e d in Massa chu s etts seek c l ean, hard surfaces on which to settle and attach

. Placem ent of shellfish waste (shells and associated m a terials, or cultch ) in g r ow-out areas attracts settling juveniles of desirable species such as the eastern oyster ( C r assostrea virginica ). C oncern has been raised over the source and proper disinfections of cultc h m a terial and the pot ential transport of shellfish pathogens or other associated nonindigenous species.

Finfish culture: Growth and m a intenance of finfish in open system s such as raceways, flow-through tanks, and net pens expose surrounding aquatic system s to pathogens associated w ith cultured fish populations. DFW c a refully regulates this industry, requiring that species cultured in watersheds wh ere they are n o t native are isolated fro m
natura l sys t e m s. The DFW m a intains and period i cally upd ates a lis t of species that ca n be cultured in Massachusetts under specified conditions.

Genetic dilution: Cultured fin and shellfish often represent im ported or altered genetic stocks that are selected for m a xi m u m growth or som e other desirable trait (i.e., shell shape and color) in the selected culture set ting (CZM, 1995). Cultured stocks are usually at a disadvantage in competing with wild populations. However, interbreeding m a y dilute the wild genetic pool, m a king offspr ing more poorly adapted to lif e in natural system s. While there are curr ently f e w m a rine finfish opera tions in Massachusetts, such operations are comm on i n other parts of the Gu lf of Maine and coul d m a ke their way to the Massachusetts Coast. Shellfish growing operati ons are abundant in the
Commonwe a lth, particularly on Cape Cod.

Massachusetts has addressed m a ny of these concerns through existing legislation (see State Autho r ities and Pro g ram s : DFW and DMF) . As a result, the AIS Managem e nt Plan does not focus heavily on the aquaculture indus try. However, several tasks related to the

22prevention of introductions through the shellf ish and aquaculture industries have been identified Section IV.

Aquarium/Water Ga rden Trade

Nonindigenous m a rine and freshwater orga nisms can be introduced accidentally or purposefully after being impor ted for use in aquaria and water gardens (Carlton, 2001; Crow & Hellquist, 2000). DFW pr ohibits the s a le of m o st f r eshwater fish that can overwinter in the wild in temperate clim a t es. However, freshwater m acrophytes available through these industries ar e often native to tem p e r ate regi ons, and are selected due to their ability to thrive und er adverse environm ental conditions. Of addition a l concern is the m i slabeling of im por ted organism s, partic ularly aquatic plants, which m a y then be confused with native or i nnocuous species and released.

Currently, Massachusetts’s author ity to m onitor and regulate sales of invasive plants and invertebrates through the aquarium and water ga rden trades is unclear or non-existent. While DFA has authority over pet stores, inspect ions focus on anim al health and safety. The AIS W o rking Group will f o rm a subcom m ittee to deve lo p a stra tegy f o r m a naging the im port of dangerous aquarium and water ga rd en plants an d anim als as well as dev e lop and distribute best m a nagem e nt practices for the disposal of unwanted aquarium organism s.

R e s e a r c h a n d S u p p l y
Marine and freshwater speci es can be ordered from re search and education supply

com p anies around the w o rld through catalogue or Internet web sites. W h ile these organism s are generally supplied for rese arch purposes, m u ltiple com p anies supply species for use in hom e aquaria. Few organism suppliers, including m a rine labs and research facilities, require docum entation of us e and handling practices prior to shipping. Massachus etts has lim ited capacity to m onito r and regula t e th e im port of these spec ies, particularly those that are obtained through m a il order or vi a the Internet. Control of introductions via this pathway is likely a federal responsibil ity, though states can play a role by ensuring that providers caref u lly m onitor their shipm e nts and provide

recomm endations for care and handling.

Once organism s are delivered, im proper handling techniques m a y result in the releas e of nonindigenous im ports. Both lab and field rout ines present the opportu nity for accidental or purposeful release through wa stewater discharge, disposal of unwanted organism s, poorly contained studies, etc. At leas t one invasion has been docum e nted in Massachus etts via this p a thway (W hitlatch et al., 1995).

The Marine Biological L a borat ory, Woods Hole, is currentl y developing guidelines for both distribution and handling of nonindigenous organism s. Through the im ple m entation of this plan, Massachus etts and th e Nort heas t Reg i onal Panel w ill undertake steps to ensure that such m a nage m e nt practices ar e considered for im plem entation by research
f acilities an d labora t or ie s m a intainin g and di stributing live aquatic organism s in the region.

23Priority Species (Or S p ecies Grou ps)

The species described below were designated as high prio rities by the AIS W o rking

r o u p b a s e d o n t h e f o l l o w i n g p r i o r i t y species designation criteria. G

1) Severity of the problem posed to Ma ssachuse tts by the in trod uced spec ies

. 2) Existing capabilities for m a nage m e nt (s pecies for which m a na gem e nt options are

curren tly av ailab l e are given higher priority). 3) Associated costs and benefits of m a nagem e nt.
Species were selected based on a review of the most current lists of nonindigenous aquatic species in Massachusetts (Appendi x E). Further prioritization was based on evaluation by subcomm i ttees of the Worki ng Group and completion of priority species
inf o rm ation tem p lates (table 1).

T a b l e 1 : Priority Spe c ie s Inf o rm ation Tem p late

1) Taxonomic nam e (or m a jor taxa for groups) 2) Comm on nam e 3) Place and tim e of intr oduction (if already here) 4) Transport vectors (i nitial and subsequent) 5) Geographic range 6) Life history (if known) or provide reference 7) Ecological im pacts (if know n), existing and potential 8) Econom i c im pacts (if known), existing and potential 9) Current research 10) Research needs 11) Current (Massachuse tts) m a nagem e nt actions 12) Potential/desired m a nagem e nt actions

The AIS W o rking Group will form alize inform ation found in priority sp ecies tem p lates and will m a ke this inf o r

m ation available once te mplates hav e been pee r reviewed. T h e AIS W o rking Group will update the list of priority species annually based on new inform ation generated through im plem e n t a t i o n o f t h i s p l a n

.

E s t a b l i s h e d Freshw ater Species

The following species are established in Ma ssachusetts fresh w ater sys t em s and are

o n s i d e r e d h i g h e s t p r i o r i t i e s f o r m a nagem e nt. c
Aquatic Macrophytes : To date, invasive freshw ater pl ants have received the greatest

am ount of at tention in Massachusetts am ong a qua tic invaders due to their dram atic and widespread impacts on lakes and ponds thr oughout the Commonwealth. Many of these species are able to propagate through both seed dispersal a nd fragm e ntation, resulting in rapid colonization through a va riety of natural and hum a n vectors (Crow and Hellquist, 2000). These species often for m dense m a ts at th e water’s surface, significantly altering the original community structure, blocki ng shipping lanes, restricting sw imm i ng and

24fishing, and generally rendering the waterway u nusable. Priority aqua tic invasive plants estab lished in Massachu s etts inc l ude :

Water chestnut ( Trapa natans ). •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

• Hydrilla ( Hy drilla ver tic illata ). Curly leaf pond weed ( Potamogeton crispus ). Fanwort ( Cabomba caroliniana ).
Lesser naiad (

Najas minor ). Waterweed ( Egeria densa ). Yellow floating-heart ( Nymphoides peltata ).
Eurasian wa ter m ilf oil ( Myriophyllum spicatum ).
Variable m ilf oil ( Myriophyllum heterophyllum ).

Existing control efforts in Massachusetts are conducted largely through local initiatives,

m a ny of whi c h receive support from the DEM Lakes and Ponds Program . Im proved detection and rapid response to new invasions and additional public edu c a tion a r e pr io rity actions for m a nage m e nt of aquatic invasive plant species.

Common Reed ( Phragmites austra lis ): Invading both fresh and saline marshes, Phragmites for m s dense monocultures, displacing native vegetation and reducing habitat value of m a ny wetland system s (Crow a nd Helquist, 2000). Often responding to modified drainage, Phra gmites can impede acces s to water b odies and co mpletely clo g channels and drainage ditche s. Removal is by m echanical harvesting, application of herbicides, or restoration of natural h y drology , and is difficult and costly. There has been debate over whether Phragmites australis is a native species that has aggressively responded to hum a n disturbance or an im ported variety better suited to rapid growth in North Am erican wetland environm ents (Ohio Sea Grant, 2000 ). Recent research (200 2) suggests that an aggressive strain of Phra gm ites has been introduced to North Am erica (Saltonstall, 2002).

Purple Loosestrife ( Lythrum salica r ia ): Th is n o w prolif ic wetland spe c ies was introduced as early as 1824 in New Engla nd and Canada, likely escaping from flower gardens (Crow and Hellquist, 2000). This plan t, which is still sold in Massachusetts retail nurseries, is disperse d through seed and rhizom es, and form s dense m a ts excluding all other plant species in m a ny types of fr eshwater and brackish wetlands (Hellquist, 2001). W h ile its presence reduces the ecolo gical value of wetland systems, purple loosestrife serves as an important polle n sou r ce f o r bees and commercial beekeeping operations. Currently, managem e nt effort s are focused on experim e ntal biological

contro l and are led by th e Massachu s etts W e tland Restoration Program (MWRP) and the Association of Massachu s etts W e tlan d Scientis ts statewide. Ef f ective control of th is species will require continued m onitoring and research into biocont ro l ef f e ctiv eness a nd elim ination of sales through nurseries in the Northeast.

T h r e a t e n i n g F r e s h w at er Species

The species listed below have not yet b een documented in Massachusetts, but are considered as viable threats to freshw ater sy stem s in the Nor t h e aste rn United State s

.

25Z e bra Mussel ( Dreissena polymorpha ): Introd uction of the zebra m u ssel in to the G r eat Lakes and the resulting impacts such as fouling, alteration of community structure, and

com p etition with rar e sp ecies led to an incr eased awareness o f the AIS problem at the national level, and the passage of the Nati onal Invasive Species Prevention and Control Act. Since its introduction in 1988, the zebra m u ssel has spread throughout m a ny of t h e

m a jor drainage basins of the Midwest and Northeast, including the Mississippi River down to the Gulf of Mexico (USGS, 2002). The zebra m u ssel has yet to be docum ented in Massachu s etts, bu t has recen tly been found in Connecticu t in the Housatonic watershed, which lie s o n the Mass achusetts/Connecticut border.

Clearly, keeping the zebra m u ssel out of Mass achusetts is a high priority. Increased efforts towards m onitoring for this species, and developm ent of a rapid response strategy will be e sse ntia l to m i nim i ze its im pacts on the a quatic envir o nm ents of the
Commonwe a lth.

Asian Clam ( Corbicula fluminea ): The Asian clam was f i rst reported in the United States in W a shington’s Colum b ia River in the 1930s. It was likely introduced intentionally for harv est and consumption purposes (Count s, 1986). Since then it has spread across the country and has been docum ented in the Connectic ut R i ver just a few

m iles south of the Massachusetts border (Sm ith, 2001; pers. comm.). The m o st prominent

econom ic impacts of the Asian clam introducti on in the United States have been related to biofouling of power plant wa ter intakes and other m unicipal and industrial water intake and supply s y stem s (Isom et al. 198 6, W illiam s and McMah on 1986). Ecological
im pacts resu lt from competition with native sp ecies for space and other lim ited resources. The Asian clam has been blam ed for the dec line a nd local extincti ons of several native freshwater mussel species (W illiam s , 1997).

Aquatic Macrophytes : Several species of aquatic plan ts are causing m a jor econom ic and environm ental dam a ge in Southern and Mid-At lantic states. T h ese plants include:

Parrot fea t h e r ( Myriophyllum aquaticum ). •

•

•

• European frog-bit ( Hydrocharis morus-ranae ).
Giant sa lvin ia ( Sa lvin ia molesta ).

Recent trend s in their d i s t ribu tions sh ow th at thes e plants are moving northward towards Massachusetts and m a y be able to surviv e New England winters (Crow and Helquist, 2000, Langland, 1996).

Freshw ater Fish : DFW has iden tif ie d severa l f i s h species as posing sign if icant th reats to the natural resources of the Comm onwealth. The following fi sh species cannot be kept without a perm it from DFW (321 CMR 9.01(3)):

The grass carp ( Ctenopharyngodon idella ) is an herbivorou s f i sh that is n a tive to China. In the 1960s, the US began to cultu re the grass carp fo r biological control of rooted aquatic vegetation. Since the n, the fish has escaped from containm ent facilities to invade the su rrounding aquatic habitats. The grass carp is now found

26in all 48 con tiguous states of the US. Though the grass carp h a s successfully decreased populations of certain aquatic invasive m acrophytes, it is not selective in its f eed in g and is cap able of destroying all of the plant life where it has been introduced, including native species. In Massa chu s etts, som e believ e tha t it m a y also have been intentionally introduced to som e ponds as a food source (Hartel et al., 1996). Introduction of the grass carp m a y also be responsible for the presence of nonindigenous parasites in waters of the US, such as the A s ian tapeworm (Ganzhorn et al., 1992). Despite these c oncerns and the banning of the grass carp in num erous states, these fish are still be ing raised and introduced as biological controls of aquatic m acrophytes.

The popularity of the vari ous piranha species ( P

y

gocentrus spp. and Serrasalmus spp.) as aquarium fish has resulted in their introduction to many US states including Massachusetts (USGS, 2002). Though these fish are not likely to survive win t ers in the Northeas t, th ese species are renowned as voracious predators that can quickly im pact local populations of fish and invertebrates (Moe, 1964). Sale and possession of this species is still legal in several Northeastern states, and it is read ily available v i a the In ternet trade. •

•

• The rudd ( Scardinius erythrophthalmus ) was originally im ported from Europe in the late 1800s to be used as a baitfi sh. The species has since been found in freshwater and estuarine ha bita ts in at leas t 20 sta t es, including m o st of the Northeastern United States. Reproducing populations of rudd have been found in the lower C h arles R i ver in Boston. Disp ersal appears to be through interstate traffic from the bait and a quaculture industries rather th an new European im ports. The im pact of the rudd is largely unknown, but it is able to hybridize with the native golden shiner. The rudd will like ly com p ete for invertebrate food sources with native fish species (Burkhead an d W illiam s , 1991).

The walking catfish ( Clarias batrachus ) first escaped from a Florida aquarium fish far m in the m i d-1960s. It has since invaded the entire so uthern region of Florida and has also been found in Connecticut, California, Georgia, Massachusetts, and Nevada. An extrem ely opportunistic species that will feed on any available food source, the walking catfi sh has the potential to cause serious dam a ge to native species (USGS, 2002). The walking ca tf ish is also read ily available through Internet web sites as an aquarium fish.

Established Ocean and Coastal Species

The following species are found in the m a rine and estuarine environm ents of Massachusetts. Though most are well esta blished, reductions in the populations of organism s, like the green crab and shellfis h pathogens, could result in m easurable

econom ic benefits, and a shift toward s histo r ical b i ological co mmunities in Massachusetts.

European Green Cra b ( Carcinus maenus ) : T h e European green crab was probably introduced to New England via ballast water in the m i d-1800s. Now the most prolific

27crab in M a ss achusetts co astal waters, the gree n crab is a voracious predator of aquatic

m acroinvertebrates, and has been blam ed by some for the collapse of the New England soft-shelled clam industry (Pim entel et al., 1999). Eradication of this now naturalized species is not possible. However, reducti ons in the overall population size m a y allow populations of displaced native species to recover. Continued research on commercial uses and bio l ogical controls will b e n ecessary to impact this p opulation.

Asian Shore Crab ( Hemigrapsus sanguineus ): The Asian s hore crab was first docum ented in North Am erica alon g the coas t o f southern New Jersey in 1988 (W illiam s and McDermott, 1990). Likely introduced via ballast water, this crab has expanded its range southward to North Carolina and north to northern Maine at the Canadian border. Little is known about the ro le this species could play in changing coas tal ecosystem
structure. H o wever, in rocky intertidal ar eas dominated by boulder and cobble substrates, this species has been found in de nsities of 80 to 100 individuals/m 2 (L.D. Sm ith, as quoted by Blake, 2001) sugges ting that it m a y be having dram atic im pac t s on the intertidal community. Continue d research on the life history and im pacts of this species will be im portan t to de ter m ine appropria te next ste p s in its m a nagem e nt.

Lace Bryozoan ( Memb ranipora me mbranacea ) : Initia lly s e ttling on k e lp where it f o r

m s f l at colon i es , this spe c ie s is a ca lca r e ous bryozoan whose growth weakens the alga and causes it to break. The lace bryozo a n has contributed to the declin es of kelp beds in the Gulf of Maine since the early 1990s, fac ilitating colonization by another invader, Codium fragile ssp. tomentosoides. The introduction of these organism s has caused declines in available habitat for im portan t finfish such as juvenile cod, the green sea urchin ( Strongylocentrotus droebochiensis ), and num erous invertebra te species (Scheibling, 2001).

An introduced opistobranch or other predatory snails m a y gr aze this species. More research into specific predator s, effects of local predator s on the population, and better docum entation of ecological effects are necessary to understand the im pacts and

m a nage m e nt of this organism (Harris and Mathieson, 2000; Chavanich and Harris, 2000; Harris and T y rell, 2001).

Codium (Codium fragile ssp . tomentosoides) : The green algae Codium fragile was first docum ented in the Gulf of Maine in 1964 at Boothbay Harbor, Maine (Harris and Mathieson, 1999; Boerner 1972; Coffin and Stic kney 1966). Codium can now be found in rocky inte rtid al and su btida l habitats from the Gulf of St. Lawrence in Canada to North Carolina. Where found, codium c a n radically change community composition, structure, and function (Harris and Mathieson, 1999). It has been blam ed for lower abundances of
lim pets, chitons, and brittle stars in N ova Sc otia (Scheibling, 2001). This algae has also devastated kelp beds off the coasts of Nova Scotia and Maine, and disrupted cyclical synergistic interactions between kelp and se veral sea urchin speci es (Scheibling, 2001). These disru p tions are ex pected to have m a jo r impacts on sub tidal systems, but they are not yet well docum ented or understood (Harri s and Mathieson, 1999). Impacts m a y also include change in water flow and sedim e nt ation ra te, lower wa ter and ligh t qualities, altered food webs, and lowere d productivity. Ecologically and econom ically im portant

28species such as finfish, sea urch ins, and lobsters m a y be affe ct ed, as they utilize ke lp for food, habitats, and nurseries (Scheibling, 2001).

Ascidians: Also called tunicates or sea squirts, ascidians are encrusting o r ganism s that are ab le to rapidly co lon i ze m a rine substrates as solitary organism s or in colonies. Potential im pacts of these organism s include competition with native species f o r suitab l e substrate, direct im pacts to organisms on wh ich they settle and attach, and fouling of vessels and coastal infrastructure (pipes, trap s. etc.). To date, six nonindigenous species of tunicates have been docum e nted in New England waters: Styela clava, Styela canopus, Diplosoma listerianum, Ascidiella aspersa

, Botryllus schlosseri, and Botr yllo ides
violaceous.

Ecological impacts of these organism s re m a in largely unknown, though concern has been raised by the i r ab ility to r a pidly spread over vast geographic areas. St y e la and Botrylloides were docum ented to have spread from Connecticut to Maine in fewer than 10 years (W hitlach and Os m a n, 2000). Resear ch into m eans of transport and control technolog ies will be necessary to m a nage im pacts from these organism s.

Shellfish Pathogens : Sh ellf ish pa tho g ens have p e riod ically d ecim a ted shellf ish s t ock s throughout the United States, particularly in the C h esapeake B a y region. S h ellfish pathogens of concern in the Northeast in clude both cryptogenic species and species thought to have been recently introduced to Massachusetts coastal waters. Difficulty in identifying these species m a kes track ing their distribution difficult. Range expansion of these organism s is generally attributed to th e planting of contam inated shellfish seed and the warm ing of near shore ocean temperatu r es . T h e following are sev e ral exam ples of
im portant sh ellf ish pa tho g ens in Mas s achusetts :

MSX ( Haplosporidian nelsoni ) f i rs t appeared in W e llf l eet H a rbor, Massachusetts, in 1967 when it was revealed as the cause of a large eastern oyster ( Crassostrea vergin i ca ) mortality on a private oyster gran t (Hickey, 2001, pers. comm.). It is believed that MSX was introduced into W e llfleet through an oyster transplant
from an infected area in Virginia. De tection of the disease prom pted DMF to prohibit any oyster transplants in the Commonwealth without state approval.
Perm its f o r oyster trans p lants are no w issu ed only after disease testing of oyster stocks and a review of the disease histor y of the source. This process prevented spread for 15 years until m i sreading of tissue slides allo wed introduction into Cotuit Bay. MSX is now known to exist in other locations in Massachusetts.
Attem p ts to develop disease resistant oys ter stocks have yet to be successf ul. Control of oyster m ovem e nt and sources of oyster stocks and careful pathological monitoring are the best available m e thods of m a naging this pathogen. •

• SSO ( Haplosporidian costalis ) was considered a di sease of concern in Massachusetts in the 1970s but was later d eclared endem i c in the Northeast and a non-factor in causing appreciab le m o rtalities of oysters in cooler regions (Hickey, 2001, pers. comm .). Rec e ntly, it has b een looked at again as a possible

29nonindigenous pathogen of concern and m a y be responsible for significant oyster losses.

Derm ocystidium ( Perkinsus marinu s ): Another eastern oyster pathogen,
Derm ocystidium

, or De rm o, was first docum ented in the Gu lf of Mexico in the late-1940s after it caused a large-scale oyster die-off (Mackin, 1966). Later,
Derm o was blam ed for m a ssive oyster k ills in the Chesapeake Bay. Since 1990 it has been docum e nted fr om Delaware Ba y to Southern Maine (Ford, 1996). As with MSX and SSO, eradication of this pathogen is lik ely impossible.
Minim i zing contam ination will r e quire ca ref u l sc reening of o y ster s eed a nd monitoring of existing oyster growing areas. •

• QPX (Quahog Parasite Unknown) was fi rst docum ented in Massachusetts 1992 but is suspected to be a significant cause of quahog ( Mercenaria mercenaria ) mortality prior to 1990. Currently, it s range extends from Ne w Brunswick, Canada, where it was first docum ented in 1960, to New Jersey and Virginia where it has been found within the last five years (Ragone et al., 1997). A third m a jor infestation occurred in the spring of 2001 in several Cape Cod em baym ent s (Fraser, 2001). As with oyster diseases, m a nagem e nt of this invader will require careful m onitoring of the sources of she llf ish s eed as well as a dult quahog s in grow-out areas across th e state.

T h r e a t e n i n g O c e a n a n d C o a s t a l S p e c i e s
The following m a rine and estuarine species h a ve been documented in the United States, but not yet in New England. Several of th ese species listed below have had dram atic ecological and econom i c im pacts outside of their respective native ranges.

Veined Rapa Whelk ( Rapana venosa ): Native to the Sea of Japan, the veined rapa whelk was introduced to the Black S ea in th e 19 40s from where it spread to the Mediterranean Sea and subsequently the Ch esapeake Bay, where it was discovered in 1998 (Harding and Mann, 1999). This sp ecies feeds on reef for m ing and epibenthic bivalves and has caused m a jor da m a ge to the she llf ish indu str y in the Bla c k Sea. Ther e is serious concern about the im p act this species could have on sim ilar Atlantic Coast
f i sheries as well as na tiv e benthic community structures. Cu rrently, the potential range of this organ i sm is unknown, and addition a l resear ch in to its ability to tolerate cold-water conditions will be necessary to d e term ine the need for additional prev entative m e asures in Massachu s etts.

Nori ( Porphyra yezoensis ): Red algae of the genus Porphyra are th e m o st widely

consum ed s eaweed in the world (Ohio S ea Grant, 2000), and se veral species of Porphyra

are comm only found along the Massachusetts co ast. An effort to grow a nonindigenous species of th e algae, Porphyra yezoensis

, for commercial purposes is underway in the coastal waters of southern Maine. C u rrent res earch is largely focused on developing a varie t y tha t is better adap ted to the waters of the Gulf of Main e but will not sexually reproduce nor out-com pete native species in vege tative grow th. There is concern in the

30region over the potential escape and p r olifera tion of this and othe r cu ltivated algal species.

Chinese Mitten Crab ( Eriocheir s i nensis ): The Chinese m itten crab has undergone explosive growth along the California coast si nce its discovery in San Francisco Bay in 1992. A highly valued f ood item throughout Chin a, it is unclear if this species was inten tiona lly introdu ced, or was relea s ed in ba llas t water o r ig inating in the Yellow Sea or Europe (W ynn et al., 2000). Threats from th is species include clogging of fish collection devices, fish-ways and hydropower intakes; dama ge to levees and other coastal structures that result from its burrowing habits; and al teration of the native comm unity structure through predation (W as hington Sea Grant, 2001). The dram a tic ability of this species to grow in great num bers as shown in central California ind i cates the need to prevent the introduction of this species to New England wa ters and to develop a response protocol in the even t tha t it is discovered here.

Pacific Oys t er: ( Crassostrea gigas ): The Pacific oyster was in tentionally introduced to the United S t ates from Ja pan for comm ercial culture in the early 1900s. T hough this species is able to survive in cold Pacific wa ters, it spawns at about 18 degrees Celsius and thus only sporadically in w ild populations along the Pacific C o ast of the United States (Pacific States Marine Fisheries Comm ission, 2001). This species would likely survive and reprodu ce in th e warm er waters of the S outh Coast of Massachusetts (Buzzards Bay) and Cape Cod where water tem p eratures of ten exceed 20 degrees during summer m o nths (Estrella and Glenn, 1999). The Pacific oys ter m a y out-com pete the eastern oyster ( Crassostrea virgin ica ) for space, dilute the local gene tic sto c k through interbreeding

, and potentially introduce a variety of shellfis h pathogens native to the Pacific (Hickey, 1979). There is current con cern over the inten tional introduction of this species by shellfish growers or unintentional discard by a m e m b er of the gene ral public. Additional

m easures for preven tion include education targeted at the a quaculture indust ry regarding threa t s to n a tive oys ter s p ecies.

Caulerpa ( Caulerpa taxifolia ): Dubbed “the killer algae,” this aquatic plant with a feather-like appearance has cause d trem endous ecological dam a ge in the regions where it has invaded. This alga is a ssociated with the aquatic pet industry and public aquarium s. In the late 1980s, a hybrid strain of Caulerpa ta xifo lia i n va de d t h e M e di te r r a ne a n c o as t

, believed to have been accidentally releas ed by a public aquarium (Meinesz, 1999). T h e invasiv e hyb rid strain was recen tly d i scove red alo ng the Calif ornia co ast. Although prim arily a warm -water species, this hybrid can thrive in tem p er atures as low as 5 degrees Celsius (Makow ka, 2000). Caulerpa ta xifo lia has been banned for im portation into th e United State s yet it is still sold in m a ny areas and is av ailab l e th rou gh the In tern et trade.

31

### IV. Management Objectives and Actions

The f o llowing objective s and action s outlin e a f i ve-yea r plan f

o r AIS m a nagem e nt in Massachusetts in order to achieve the following overarching Goal.

By 2007, fully implement a coordinated approac h to minimizing the ecological and socioeconomic im pacts of aquatic inva sive species in the marine a nd freshwater environm ents of

a s s a c h u s e t t s

. M

Objectives and actions were developed to a ddres s prior ity sp ec ies and transport vector

m a nage m e nt concerns, and to expand the genera l capab ilities of Massach usetts agencies and organizations to address AIS issues.

Resources currently dedicated to each objective ha ve been id entif ied with in task d e scr i ptions along with estim ates of addition a l res ource requirem e nts for the com p letion of each task. Massachusetts does not expect to receive all of the necessary funds to fully im ple m ent this plan from the federal A N S Task Force. The AIS W o rking Group has beg un to seek addition a l resources th rough avenu e s such as s t ate a nd federal grants an d will use th e following objectives and actions to direct future state and federal appropriations. A c ronym s used to denoted s t ate and federal agencies a nd other entities are shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Acronym s for agencies and organiza tions referenced in Managem e nt O b j e c t i v e s a n d A c t i o n s ( b e l o w )

.

CZM Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Managem e nt

D E M M a s s a c h u s e t t s Departm e nt of Environm ental Managem e nt

D E P M a s s a c h u s e t t s Departm e nt of Environm ental Protection

DFA Massachusetts Departm e nt of Food and Agriculture

DFW Massachusetts Division of Fish and W ildlife

DFWELE Division of Fish W ildlife a nd Environ m ental Law Enforce m ent

DFWELE Division of Fish and W i ldlife

EOEA Massachus etts Executive Of fice of Environm ental Affairs

EPA US Environm ental Protection Agency

GOMC Gulf of Maine Council

LPI Massachusetts Lakes and Ponds Initiative

MBP Massachusetts Bay National Estuary Program

MIPG Massachusetts Invasive P l ant Group

NEAMGL L Northeast Association of Marine and Great Lakes Labs

NEP National Estuary Program

NIPGro New England Invasive P l ant Group

NOAA National Oceanic and A tmospheric Adm i nistration

USGS US Geological Survey

WRP Massachusetts W e tlands Restoration Program

32The approxim a te year of im plem entation for each task has been identified following each task description. A detailed annual work plan will be developed f o llowing the subm ission of this plan and prior to each su bsequent year of im plem entation. Work plans will be dev e loped based on foreseeab le res ources av ailable for im plem entation during each year and incorporate additional m a nagem e nt needs as they are recognized.

Objective I: Coordination:

Strategic Action 1A: Coordinate Massa chusetts AIS Management Activities

Issue add r es sed : Current AIS m a nagem e nt efforts in Massachusetts have not been fully coordina ted across ag enc i es. Dedic a ted staff will be necess a ry for effective
im ple m entation of AIS control strategies.

Task 1A1 : (DEM/CZM/MBP) DEM will support two full tim e positions to coordinate and im ple m ent actions identified in the La kes and Ponds W a tershed Action Strategy (Lakes and Ponds Program Coordinators ). A portion of their tim e will be devoted to AIS Managem e nt Activities in addition to ex isting DEM staff tim e dedicated to AIS

m a nage m e nt actions (totaling approxim at ely 0.75 FTE). EOEA has dedicated $45,000 for the support of these staff. DEM is seeking an additional $30,000 to support 0.5 full
tim e equivalent em ployees (FTE) dedicated sp ec if ically to implem e ntation of action s identified in this plan in f r eshwater syst em s. CZM has dedicated funding to support 0.25 FTE and is seeking r e sou r ces f o r an a ddition a l 0.7 5 FTE to coordina te coa s tal AIS

m a nage m e nt activities (C ZM Coastal AIS C oordinator). The MBP has dedicated 0.4 FTE to working o n coasta l AI S issues ( M BP Coasta l AIS Coordinator). S t aff from these three agencies will be respon sible for the o v er all im plem e n t a t i o n o f t h i s p l a n

. Y E A R O N E

Task 1A2: (CZM/DEM/MBP) The Lakes and Ponds Program Coordinators and the Coastal AIS Coordinato rs will org a nize f our m eetings of the AIS W o rking Group

a n n u a l l y

. O NGOING

Task 1A3: (AIS W o rking Group/Council on Invasive Species) The AIS Working Group will m eet annually with other m e m b er groups of the Mass ach usetts Coun cil on Invasive Species (the Massachusetts Invasive P l ant Group, the Invertebrate Invasives and Biocontrols Group, and the W ildlife and Plant Diseases Group) to identif y priority species and sites for m a nagem e nt and to c oordinate overall invasive species control

e f

f o r t s

. Y E AR ONE/ONGOING

Strategic Action 1B: Coordinate With Other States and Nations to Prevent Interstate and International Transport of AIS

Issue add r es sed : AIS m a nagem e nt is a regional is sue and not confined by political boundaries. Form al m e c h anism s for intersta te an d internation a l coord i nation will be necessary to lim it new introductions and the spread of established populations.

33Task 1B1: ( C ZM/MIT Sea Grant/GOMC/DEM/MBP) CZM will con tinu e to coord i n a te with state and federal agencies and industry representatives in the region to im ple m ent a Northeast R e gional ANS Panel. CZM will co -c hair and s t af f the Panel a nd has dedic a ted
0

. 2 5 F T E t o t h i s t a s k t h r o u g h 2 0 0 3

. Y E A R O N E

Task 1B2: (CZM/DEM/MBP) The Lakes and Ponds Program and Coastal AIS Coordinato rs will participate in n a tio na l and in ternational AIS workshops and
conferences. O N G O I N G

Task 1B3: (AIS W o rking Group/DEM/MIT Sea Grant/NIPGro) AIS W o r k ing Group

m e mbers will coo r dina te with othe r New Engl and states to s h are educ ational resou r c e s related to aquatic invasive plant m a nagem e nt. Specific coordinating efforts include biennial inform ation sharing conferences sponsored by the NIPGro, an ongoing exchange
of

education a l m a teria l s between DEM and the N e w Ha m p shire Departm e nt of Environm ental Services, and distribution of the S ea Grant Aq uatic Nuisan ce Species Report (Ohio Sea Grant, 2000) and Proceed ings o f the First N a tional Marine Bioinvasions Conference (Pederson, 2000). To date, MIT Sea Grant has expended $60,000 for printing and distributi o n s c o s t s

. Y E A R O N E / O N G O I N G

Task 1B4: (MBP) MBP, in conjunction with six other National Estuary P r ogram s, (NEPs) has received $12, 000 from the US EPA t o sponsor a Northeast R e gional Marine Bioinvasions W o rkshop. The focus of the two- day workshop, to be held in the fall of 2002, will b e the m onitoring and m a nagem e nt of m a r i n e i n v a d e r s

. Y E A R O N E

Strategic Action 1C: Coordinate with Federal Agencies to Develop Regional Priorities and Sound Management Ac tivities at the Federal Level

Issue add r es sed : AIS m a nagem e nt strategies at the federal level should be fully coordinated with state and re gional managem e nt efforts and guided by regional priorities.

Task 1C1: (CZM) The CZM Coastal AIS Coordi nator and additional A I S W o rking Group m e mbers will participate in meetings of the federal A N S Task Force. CZM has dedicated $3,000/year for t r a v e l e x p e n s e s

. O N G O I N G

Objective 2 : Preventio n

. Strategic Action 2A: Assess the Risks and Types of Intro duction Through Priority Transport Vectors

Issue add r es sed : Curren t ly, little is k nown regarding the specific role transport vectors play in AIS introduction and spread in Ma ssachusetts and the region. Careful study of species introduction through th ese vectors, followed by efforts to comm uni cate with related industry representatives, will be a critical first st ep in reducing AIS transport.

Task 2Al: ( S m ith/W illiam s/MIT Sea Grant/Nor theaste rn) Th e team of research ers f r o m Sm ith Colle ge, W illiam s College, M I T Sea Grant, and Northe astern Univ e r sity will m a ke

34the results of Massachusetts Com ponents of the New England Tran sport Vector Study identified in Section III early in 2002. Results will include lists of species im ported to and exported from Massachusetts as well as handling practices that pose a risk of introductions through:

The seafood industry. •

•

•

•

• Trade of species for bait (fish and invertebrates). The aquariu m trade.
Marine research. Aquatic organism suppliers.

The research team has dedicated $270,000 (i ncluding funds through a grant from the National Sea Grant Office and nonfederal m a tch) to the com p letion of this task as well as
T a s k 2 A 2 ( b e l o w )

. Y E A R O N E

Task 2A2: ( S m ith/W illiam s/MIT Sea Grant/Nor theaste rn) Th e rese arch te am identif ied in Task 2Al will m a ke the results of the Transpor t Vector Stud y f o r all Ne w England states available in l a t e 2 0 0 2

. Y E A R O N E

Task 2A3: ( S m ith/W illiam s/MIT Sea Grant) The resea r ch tea m identif ied in task 2A1 will expand this s t udy to include add ition a l tr ans port vectors. The research team has acquired $120,000 from the National Sea Grant Of fice for the com p letion of this project,
which will include work shops sim ilar to thos e described in tasks 2B1 and 2B2 (below).
YEAR T W O

Task 2A4: (AIS W o rking Group) A freshwater s ubcomm ittee of the AIS Working Group will ass e ss the need to expand the ab ove study to transpo r t vectors relatin g to freshwater system s i n M a s s a c h u s e t t s

. Y E A R O N E

Strategy Action 2B: Coordinate With Industry Representatives to Minimiz e Introductions of Invaders Through Priority T r ansport Vectors

Issue add r es sed : Ef f ectiv e m a nagem e nt of AIS will f u rthe r req u ire that ind u stries th at

m a y serve as transpo r t v ectors b e inv o lved in AIS prevention efforts.

Task 2B1: ( S m ith/W illiam s/MIT Sea Grant, MB P) Research ers f r om the New England Transport V ector S t udy will work with MB P to convene focus groups m a de up of

repres entatives from industries id entified as potential pathways fo r introduction (Section III) as well as the comm e r cial shipping industry to identify priority preventative strategies and educational needs. T h e re search team has allocated $10,000 to support staff tim e and

w o r k s h o p c o s t s

. Y E A R O N E

Task 2B2 : (MBP/AIS Working Group) The M a ssachus etts Bays Program will work with a subcomm i ttee of the A I S W o rking Group to establish ongoing working groups m a de up of industry representatives to carry out st r a t e g i e s i d e n t i f i e d i n t a s k 2 B 1

. Y E A R
TW O/ONGOING

35Strategic Action 2C: Educate Industr y Representatives Regarding Possible Means of Introductions Through De velopment and Dissemination of Targeted Outreach Ma teria l s

Issue add r es sed : Representatives of industries that pos e the risk of AIS transport m a y be unaware of the problem s associated with AIS introductions and existing options for

m a nage m e nt

.

Task 2Cl: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rk ing Group will id entify ed ucation a l needs through the above focus and working grou ps and develop educational strategies for representatives of priority industries (see also Objective 6: E d u c a t i o n )

. Y E A R T W O

Strategic Action 2D: Improve Data Management as It Relates to AIS
Distributio ns in Massa chusetts W a ters heds and in the Northeast Region

Issue add r es sed : AIS dis t ribu tion inf o rm ation is curren tly ho used in m u ltiple da tabas e s and for m ats, m a king comprehensive assessm ents of introduction and the spread of established populations di fficult or impossible.

Task 2D1: ( C ZM/Northeast Region al Panel) CZM will work with the No rtheas t Regional Panel to develop a Marine Invade r Database and Web Page (CZM, 2001) using the Massachusetts and Rhode Island Rapid A ssessm e nt Survey data as the foundation. CZM has dedicated 0.2 FTE to the com p letion o f this task. An addition a l $19,000 h a s been obtained through the National Sea Grant Office to support two students for data

m i n i n g a n d d a t a b a s e p o p u l a t i o n e f f o r t s

. Y E A R O N E

Task 2D2: (DFW /DEP/DEM) The DF W will c oordina te with the DEM and DEP to develop a fram e work for a com p rehensive fr esh w ater inv a sive species d a tabas e for Massachusetts. The database will in clude information developed through ongoing monitoring efforts led by these agencies a nd will incorporate data generated through enhanced monitoring of aquatic system s known to contain rare species or represent diverse and pristine hab i tats. DFW

, DEP, and DEM will dev e lop a s t ra te gy and identif y budgetary needs for integrating existing data m a nagem e n t e f f o r t s

. Y E A R O N E

Strategic Action 2E: Reduce the Threa t of Introductions Via Commercial Shipping (Ballast Wate r and Hull Fouling)

Issue add r es sed : AIS introductions via comm ercial shipping continue to be a m a jor

concern wor l dwide. The role this ind u stry plays in Massachu s etts is cu rrently unclear, and developm ent of mea s ures at the state level to prevent the im port and export of aquatic invaders th rough this pathway w ill require im proved communication with th e commercial shipping industry.

Task 2El: (MIT Sea Grant/M assport) MIT S ea Grant and Massport will develop a regional database of ballast water discharg ed to m a jor ports in the region using the

36National Ballast Survey, a Massport survey of shipping agents and transporters

exam ining the ballast w a ter rel ease practices in Massachus etts , and additional data sets. MIT Sea Grant has com m itted $11,000 to the co mpletion of this task and is seek ing an additional $5,000 to support a resear ch assistant. YEARS ONE AND T W O

Task 2E2: (MIT Sea Grant/Massport) MIT S ea Grant and Massport will convene a regional (Canadian Maritim e Provinces and Northeastern United States) steering

comm ittee to develop long- and short-term goals for preventing or m i ni mizing nonindigenous species imports and exports via ballast wate r discharge. The W o rkshop will in clude an overview of new Ballast W a ter Reporting Requirem e nts as well as a discuss i on o f appropriate reporting p r o cedures. MIT Sea Grant has com m itted $25,000 to support an initial symposium a n d f o l l o w

- u p m e e t i n g s

. Y E A R O N E

Task 2E3: ( M asspor t) Masspor t will work with the USCG to assem b le balla st wate r reporting inf o rm ation at Massport op erated facilities. Mas s po rt will further assist and advise the coast Guard in the developm ent of sampling program s to evaluate ballast water

m a nage m e nt com p l i a n c e r a t e s i n M a s s a c h u s e t t s

. O N G O I N G

Task 2E4: (MIT Sea Grant/M assport) MIT S ea Grant and Massport will develop a strategic plan for providing ballast w a ter m a nagem e nt practice inform ation to key shipping industry decision-m akers in Northeas tern states and provin ces (s ee also Task
2 B 1 )

. Y E A R T W O

Task 2E5: (CZM/MBP/MIT Sea Grant): CZM, MBP, and MIT Sea Grant will reev aluate ballast water m a nagem e nt practices in Massachuse tts and m a ke additional

recomm endations for m a nagem e nt and/or regulations based on the findings. Massachusetts is seeking $10,000 to suppor t a r e s e a r c h a s s i s t a n t

. Y E A R T W O

Strategic Action 2F: Prevent New Introduction s of AIS Via Recreatio n al Boating and Fishing

Issue add r es sed : Continu e d and enha nced educa t ion and outre ach ef f o rts will be necessary to control the spread of fouling organism s and aquatic weeds to uninfested water bodies via recreational boating and fishing. Massac husetts m u st evaluate its capacity to f acilitate the clean ing of boats and thei r trailers at infest ed water bodies, and require the rem oval of pl ant and alga l species fro m recreation a l vehicles.

Task 2Fl: (DEM) DEM will update and distribu te si gnage relating to boat and trailer AIS transport to all ponds with boat ram p s in the Commonwealth. DEM has dedicated $13,500 to the com p l e t i o n o f t h i s t a s k t h r o u g h t h e L a k e s a n d P o n d s I n i t i a t i v e

. Y E A R S
ONE AND T W O

Task 2F2: ( D EM) DEM will con tinu e to dis t r i bute AIS educa tiona l m a terials to lake a nd pond associations. DEM has expended $8,200 for the printing of educational m a terials and is seeking an additiona l $ 1 2

, 0 0 0 f o r r e

- p r i n t i n g

. O N G O I N G

37Task 2F3: (DEM/DEP/DFWELE) DEM, DEP, a nd DFW E LE will dev e lop a pam phlet detailing the potential transpor t of AIS with boats and their trailers for distribution with boater registration form s and/or com m e rcial fi shing licen ses. Massachusetts is seek in g $10,000 to support developm ent, printing, a n d d i s t r i b u t i o n c o s t s

. Y E A R T W O

Task 2F4: (DEM/CZM/MBP) The DEM Lakes and Ponds Program and CZM and MBP Coastal AIS Coordinato r s will as semble AIS edu cation a l m a teria l s f o r dis t ribu tion to local Pub l i c A c c e s s B o a r d s

. Y E A R T W O

Task 2F5: (DEM) Through the Lakes and Ponds W a tershed Action Strategy, DEM has dedicated $4 ,500 to stud y the feasib ility of ins t alling a public boat wash station at a Massachusetts boat ram p . DEM anticipate s a cost of $40,000 for installation of the station and is seeking an additional $2,000/y ear to support general m a intenance costs. CZM, DEM, and DEP will g a ge the utility of ins t alling add i tional boat-wash sta tions b a s e d o n t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s p i l o t e f f o r t

. Y E A R T W O

Task 2F6: ( D EP/DFW ) DEP will work with DFW to evaluate Massachu s etts' s capac ity to develop an AIS inspection program for r ecrea tiona l boats. Massachus etts is se ekin g funding to support 0.2 F TE for two years to sc ope and develop a boat inspection program in Massachusetts, and a feasibility study of program i m ple m entation. YEAR T W O

Strategic Action 2G: P revent New Intr oductions of AIS Through the Seafood Industry and the Freshw ater Fish Market

Issue add r es sed : Little is curren tly k now n regarding the type and quantity of live fish and shellfish imports to Massachusetts, warrant ing further research into seafood industry practices as well as the di stribution of AIS educati onal m a terials to industry representatives.

Task 2G1: ( S m ith/W illiam s/MIT Sea Grant/CZ M /MBP /DMF) CZM will con t rac t with a student to update and expand the prelim inary list of seafood species im ports and exports generated by the New England Transport V ector Study through field surveys. CZM is seeking $5,000 to support a student for one sem e s t e r

. Y E A R O N E

Task 2G2: ( C ZM/DMF/MIT Sea Gr ant) CZM, DMF, and MIT Sea Grant will develop guidance and educational m a terials on the use of live packing m a terials for seafood transpo r t based on the p r oceed ings o f the s eafood industry fo cus group described in T a sk 2B1. CZM and MIT Sea Grant are seeking $5,0 00 to support a student researcher and the developm ent and distribution of edu cation a l m a teria l s

. Y E A R O N E

Strategic Action 2H: P revent the Introduction and Spread of Pathogens Through the Aquaculture Industry

Issue add r es sed : DMF does not currently have the in-house capacity to identify shellfish pathogens once an outbreak occurs. Recruitm en t of a shellfish pat hologist as well as

38developm ent of m easures to reduce the risk of pathogen introducti ons are necessary to lim it the im pacts of potentially devastating outbreaks.

Task 2H1: (DMF) DMF is seeking $40,000 to f und a half tim e (0.5 FTE) shellfish pathologist to assist in m onitoring for a n d i d e n t i f y i n g s h e l l f i s h d i s e a s e s

. Y E A R ONE/ONGOING

Task 2H2: ( C ZM/DMF) CZM is working with D M F and Cape Cod towns to iden tif y

econom ically viable uses for shellfish waste as w e ll as proper disinfection practices prior to use as cultch. CZM has dedicated 0.1 FTE/year to this task over two years.
ONGOING

Task 2H3: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rk ing Group will evaluate current nonindigenous gam e fish stocking pract ices in Massachusetts and develop

recomm endations for ch anges in these pr actices, if necessary

. Y E A R S T H REE-FIVE

Strategic Action 2I: Pr event Intro ducti ons of AIS to Freshw ater and Marine Systems Via the Bait Industry

Issue add r es sed : The im port of baitfish and invertebra te species along with their packing

m a terials may pose a significant threat of AI S introductions to Massa chusetts. There is currently little guidance on what species shou ld be im ported as bait or as packing

ma t e r i a l s

.

Task 2I1: ( D FW /DMF) DFW and DMF will develop gui d a nce f o r the disposal of u nused bait species for distribution with comm ercially sold bait or for printing directly on bait packing m a terials. DMF has dedicated 0.1 F TE to this task and is seeking $5,000 for printing and distribut i o n c o s t s

. Y E A R O N E

Strategic Action 2J: Prevent New I n troduction s of AIS Through the Aquarium Trade, Nur s eries and Water Garden Suppliers, and Other Wetland Vegetation Grow ers

Issue add r es sed : Species distributed for use in aq uaria and water gardens are often selected due to their ability to survive and grow with m i ni m a l care under a range of environm ental conditions. Intentional or un intentional release of these organism s is common, and several harmful introductions have been documented through these pathways worldwide.

Task 2J1: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rki ng Group will es tablish a subcomm ittee to develop a strategic plan and guidelines for lim i ting the introduction of potentially invasive species through the aquarium and wa ter garden trade. Issues addressed by this

comm ittee will in clude :

1) Im port and sale of potentially invasive invertebrate species.

392) Im port and sale of potentially invasive plant species and organism s that m a y be transpo r ted with thes e s p ecies. 3) Proper labeling of plant and anim al speci es sold by pet stores and water garden suppliers. 4) Inspections of pet stores and wate r g a rden suppliers for prio rity AIS. 5) Best m a nagem e nt practices for the dis posal of diseased or unwanted organism s

a n d w a s t e w a t e r

.

YEAR ONE

Task 2J2: ( D FA) DFA will con tinu e f i eld insp e c tions f o r sp ecies lis ted on the Mass achusetts Noxious W eed List. DFA has dedicated 3 FTE to field inspections, which include N oxious Weed List monitoring efforts (appr oxim a t e l y 0

. 5 F T E y e a r )

. O N G O I N G

Task 2J3: ( D FA) DFA will eva l uate its author ity to inc l ude additional m a rine and f r e s hwater species on the state Noxious W e e d L i s t

. Y E A R O N E

Task 2J4: ( D FA/AIS Working Grou p/MIPG) Pe nding the re sults of task 2J3, DFA will annually update the state Noxious Weed List (or a new list of a quatic invasive plant species) to include in DFA inspections in consultati on with the Massachusetts Invasive Plant Group

a n d t h e A I S W o r k i n g G r o u p

. Y E A R T W O ONGOING

Task 2J5: (DFWELE/DFW ) DFWELE and its D F W will review their authority to pu blish lists of invasive species in nonagricultura l or m i nim a lly m a na g e d a r e a s

. Y E A R O N E

Strategic Action 2K: P revent new introductio n s of AIS by Marine Research Facilities and Public Aquaria.

Issue add r es sed : Marine research f acilities often hold nonindigenous organism s for experim e ntal and display purpos es. Maintenance of these live species often requires the exchange of water with the natural environm ent, providing the opportunity for the release of these species, which often have m i cros copic life history stages. Furtherm ore, experim e ntation with live nonindigenous organism s may be conducted in the natural environm ent, requiring careful controls to pr eve n t the i r r e lea s e or esc a pe.

Task 2K1: (CZM/MPB/DMF/NEAMGLL) CZM, MB P, and DMF will cooperate with the Northe as t Associa tio n of Marine and Great L a kes La bs (NEAMGLL) to develop a notification/reporting system for the im port of live m a rine organism s for research

p u r p o s e s

. Y E AR TWO

Task 2K2: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rk ing Group will work with the New England Aquarium to develop best managem e nt practices for treat m e nt of wastewater and release of unwanted organism s from public aquaria and m a rine research facilities.
YEAR ONE

40Task 2K3: (AIS W o rking Group) Massachusetts ag encies will work to enter into a
Mem o randum of Understanding (M OU) with marine research and aquaculture facilities in the Commonwealth ensuring incorporation of best m a nagem e nt practices developed by the Marine Biological L a boratory and the AIS Working Group for the handling and distribution of nonindigenous orga nism s

. Y E A R S T H R E E

- F I V E

.

Strategic Action 2L: P revent New Introductions of AIS to Marine an d
Freshw ater Systems T h rough Aquatic Organism Supply Companies (Including Internet Sales)

Issue add r es sed : Sale of live organism s via m a il order and the Internet is common practice. Th ese organ i za tions, of ten af f iliated wi th m a rine re search f a c ilities, are ab le to ship organism s across the country, of ten with few or no restricti ons on the recipient’s purposes or handling practices.

Task 2L1: ( C ZM) CZM will con t rac t with a s t ud ent res ear ch er to identif y organiz a tions supplying live m a rine and freshwater orga nisms to Massachusetts . Massachusetts is seeking $5,000 to support this stude n t f o r o n e s e m e s t e r

. Y E A R O N E

Task 2L2: (AIS W o rking Group) A subcomm ittee of the AIS W o rking Group will m a ke

recomm endations to the f e deral ANS Task Force on lim iting introdu ctio ns to Massachusetts through the In t e r n e t t r a d e

. Y E A R T W O

Task 2L3: (AIS W o rking Group) A subcomm ittee of the AIS W o rking Group will work to identify industry representa tives and coordinate on the developm ent of shipping and d i s p o s a l g u i d e l i n e s

. Y E A R S T H R E E

- F I V E

Objective 3 : Monitorin g

Strategic Action 3A: Monitor the Introduction and Spread of AIS in
Massachusetts Coastal Waters

Issue add r es sed : The distribution of AIS in Mass achusetts marine system s is poorly understood. Continued designation of priori ties for m a nagem e nt (both species and pathways) w ill require o ngoing AIS monitoring efforts.

Task 3A1: ( M IT Sea Gr ant/MPB/C ZM) MIT S ea Grant, C Z M, and MBP will work to identify funds to conduct rapid assessm e nts su rveys of ports and harbors every five years at an estim ated cost of $30,000 per assessm e n t

. Y E A R S T H R E E

- F I V E

Task 3A2: (MBP/MIT Sea Grant/CZM/) In coop erat ion with other North e astern Na tio nal Estuary Program s , MBP has received $50,000 fr om EPA to conduct a rapid assessment survey of invasive species in in ter tid al benth i c ha bita ts in the northeas t United States. The survey is planned for the summ e r o f 2 0 0 3

. Y E A R S O N E A N D T W O

41Task 3A3: ( M BP/CZM) MBP Regional staf f w ill work with the Coastal AIS Coordinators to develop a volunteer monitoring program

. Massachusetts is seeking $10,000 to support developm ent, printing, a n d t r a i n i n g w o r k s h o p c o s t s

. Y E A R T W O

Task 3A4: (AIS W o rking Group): Representative s from the AIS W o rking Group will develop an AIS m onitoring strategy for co astal Massachusetts which will include evaluation o f resource n eeds for establishing sentinel stations for detecting new invasions in Boston Harbor and the C o n n e c t i c u t R i v e r

. Y E AR TWO

Strategic Action 3B: Monitor the Introduction and Spread of AIS in
Massachusetts Freshw ater Systems

Issue add r es sed : Effective m a nage ment of aquati c m acrophytes and other freshwater invaders will require the expa nsion of m onitoring efforts that have been lim ited by lack of staff ti m e and m onetary resources.

Task 3B1: (DEP/DEM) DEP and DEM will con tinue lakes and ponds ass e ssm ents and aquatic vegetation inventories in support of water quality asse s s m e nts and the Total
Maxim u m Daily Load (TMDL) Program

. DEP has dedicated $150,000 and 3 FTEs/year over the next two years to support these programs, representing an increase over trad ition a l funding levels by $100,000/year and 2 FTEs. DEP is seeking an additional 0.5 FTE and $50,000/year to expand the annual covera ge of this monitoring program and its effectiveness in docum enting the distribu tion of nonindigenous organism s

. O N G O I N G

Task 3B2: (DEM) Through the Massachusetts L a kes and Ponds W a tershed Action Strategy, DEM will dev e lop a volun teer “W eed Watcher” program to m o nitor for AIS invasions. DEM staff a c quired through the Lakes and Ponds W a tershed Action Strategy will ca rry ou t t h i s t a s k

. Y E A R O N E

Task 3B3: (DEP) DEP i s seeking 1 FTE to m a nage its (cu r r e ntly inf o rmal) da tabas e of aquatic m a c r ophytes in Massachus etts Lake s and Ponds. This staff person will be responsible for the developm ent of a database stru cture and form at in year two, ongoing databas e po pulation, an d web publis hing. Once developed, d a tabas e m a nagem e nt will require the equivalent of 0.5 F T E / y e a r

. Y E A R T W O / O N G O I N G

Task 3B4: ( D FW ): DFW will continue to inven t ory and m onitor s i tes where nonindigenous aquatic species are impacting native flora an d fauna, especially where they co-exist with state l i s t e d r a r e s p e c i e s

. O N G O I N G

Strategic Action 3C: Assist in the De velopment of Improved Technology for Monitoring the Spread of Nonindigenous Aquatic Macrophytes

Issues add r essed : The widespread distribution of nonindigenous aquatic macrophytes and the lim ited personnel tim e available f o r m on itorin g efforts constitu te the need for
im proved monitoring technology that facili tates large scale m o nitoring efforts.

42Task 3Cl: (USGS/DEP/DEM) Through a grant f r om the DEM, the USGS has evaluated the use of remote sensing t echnology for m onitoring and asse ssm ent of the distribution of aquatic plan ts. DEM and DEP will evalua te the results of this ef f o rt to de term ine the feasibility of an ongoing rem o te sensing ba s e d l a k e a n d p o n d m o n i t o r i n g e f f o r t

. Y E A R
TW O

Objective 4 : Early Detection / Eradication

Strategic Action 4A: Monitor the Mari ne and Freshw ate r Environments to
detect the Introduction of Nonindi genous Species to Waters of the
Commonw e a lth or the Spread of Establis hed Aquatic Invaders to Previously
Uninfested Waters as Ou tlined in Object ive 3

Strategic Action 4B: Id entify Fundi ng and Personnel Resources for the
Eradication of New Int r oductions to Previously Uninfested Waters

Issues add r essed : Once established, invasive species m a y be impossible to com p letely
eradicate . Re m oval of any introduced species w ill require a coordinated protoco l for
imm e diate response and eradication of the species of concern.

Task 4B1: (DEM/DEP/EOEA/DFW ) Through the Massachusetts L a kes and Ponds Watershed Action Strategy, Massachusetts wi ll assem b le an Em ergency Response Team

to m onitor for and eradicate pioneer infestat ions in lakes and ponds. DEM has dedicated 1.0 FTE to the developm ent of a monitoring an d response protocol in five freshwater pilot sites across the state. Massachusetts is seeking $75,000/year for the acquisition of necessary plant control supplies and equipm ent and the support of additional staff time to

m a nage the Em ergency Response Team

. Y E A R O N E

Task 4B2: (DEM/DEP/EOEA/DFW ) The Emergenc y Res ponse Team will coo r din a te with the volunteer groups involved in the W eed Watcher Program to track the distribution of freshwater inva d e r s a n d i d e n t i f y e a r l y i n f e s t a t i o n s f o r c o n t r o l

. Y E A R O N E

Task 4B3: (DFW /DEM/DEP): The Em ergency Res ponse Team will co ordinate with the
DFW ’ s Nat u ral Heritage and Endangered Specie s Program to identify potential conflicts with rare plants or anim a l s at the site of the proposed a c t i o n s

. Y E A R O N E

Task 4B4: (DMF/CZM): The Coastal AIS Coordinato rs will work with DMF to develop an AIS training program for DMF fi eld sta ff. Training will include identification of nonindigenous m a rine species and reporting protocols. Ma ssachusetts is seeking $10,000 to support staff ti m e , workshop costs, and deve lopm ent of training m a terials to com p l e te

t h i s t a s k

. Y E A R O N E

Task 4B5: (CZM/MIT Sea Grant/M B P/DMF) Th e Coastal AIS Coordinators and a subcomm ittee of the AIS W o rking Group will eval uate the n eed for and develop a co astal
Em ergency Response Team based on the m odel developed by the Lakes and Ponds Initiative. C Z M will ded i cate 0.2 FTE to this tas k

. Y E A R T W O

43Strategic Action 4C: Develop a Respon se Protocol for the Eradication of
Ne w l y Established AIS

Issue add r es sed : See the issue add r es sed by strategic action 4 B

Task 4C1: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rk ing Group will id entify ag encies responsibilities for eradicating or controlling specific types of introductions (i.e., aquatic plants, fouling organism s, m a rine sp ecies, fresh w a t e r s p e c i e s )

. Y E A R T W O

Task 4C2: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rki ng Group will develop and im ple m e n t an appropriate response protoc ol for the eradication of newl y detected priority invaders. This proto c o l will includ e specification of appropriate bio l ogical, chem ical, and physical

contro ls where nec e ssa r y, and will a ddress pr ior i ty spec ies or species g r o ups identif i e d in Section IV including, but not lim ited to:

Freshwater bivalves. •

•

•

•

• Aquatic m acrophytes. Marine and estuarine decapods. Marine and estuarine alg ae. Marine and estuarine m o l l u s k s

.

YEAR ONE

Task 4C3: (AIS W o rking Group/DFA) Based on the response protocols identified in Task 4C2, the AIS W o rking Group will work with DFA to generate a list of pesticid es currently not registered for use that m a y be necessary for the control of pioneering AIS.
YEAR T W O/ONGOING

Task 4C4: (AIS W o rking Group) M a ssachusetts w ill work to enter into a Mem o randum of Understanding with state and federal agencies and environm ental nongovernm e nt organizations that recognizes and facilitates im plem entation of early response protocols.
YEAR S THREE-FIVE

. Task 4C5: ( D EP/DFA) DEP and DFA will devel op a f acilita ted perm ittin g process and/or em ergency herbicide application provisions through the Herbicide Licensing Program . The revised process will contain ca ref u l guidelines to determ ine appropriate control technologies to be a pplied to pioneering AIS populations that consider both the effect on targeted inv a ders and secon d ary im p acts. DFA is also considering regulations that will guide the aqua tic applicatio n of all pesticides. DFA will invo lve the AIS Working Group in discussion regarding th e developm ent of t h ese regulations. Massachus etts is s eeking 0.5 FTE for two years to restructu r e the perm itting process and 0.25 FTE in subsequent years for technical assistance for appli cants undertaking the

perm itting p r o c e s s

. Y E A R T W O

44Strategic Action 4D: Evaluate the Risk of Introductions of Priority S p ecies
Not Yet Established in Massachuse tts

Issue add r es sed : Massachusetts faces the risk of in troduction from a number of species that have proven to be dam a ging in ot her regions (see Section III: Problem s and Concerns). Developm ent of a m e thodology for evaluating the risk of introduction of these spe c ie s will be n e c e ssary to ide n tif y and implem ent species- s pec i f i c preventativ e

m easures.

Task 4Dl: (AIS W o rking Group) A subcomm ittee of the AIS W o rking Group will develop a strategy for evaluating the risk of the introduction and sp read of priority species or major taxa through a pilot evaluation including one freshwater and one m a rine invader. Massachusetts is seeking $30,000 ($15,000 per species) to contract with a
student researcher to conduct these assessm en ts. Current candidates include the veined rapa whelk a nd the Chine s e m itten cra b

. Y E A R T W O

Objective 5 : Control

Strategic Action 5A: I m plemen t Earl y Response Protocols Outlined in Objective 4 for New l y Detected In festa t ions o f AIS

Strategic Action 5B: Support De velopment of Improved Control Technologies for Established Populations of AIS

Issue add r es sed : Control of established populations of AIS continues to be costly and labor intens ive in m o st if not all case s . Li m iting the spre ad o f priority AIS will requ ir e continued d e velopm ent of cost-effective and far-reach ing co ntrol techno logies.

Task 5Bl: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rking Group will work with the Invertebrate Invasives and Biocontrols Group of the I nvasive Species Council on developing a strategy to encour age research and developm ent of biological controls f o r AIS in the state and region. Research prio rities will in clude further evaluation of potential no n-targ et im pacts from the releas e of biological control m easures (see also Objectiv e 6, Education )

. O N G O I N G

Task 5B2: ( W RP) W R P will con tinu e to propag a te and r e lea s e biocontrols to reduc e populations of purple looses trife across the Commonwealt h. W R P has dedicated $7,000
for the com p letion of this task and is s eek ing an ad dition a l $2,0 00/year for the purchas e of biocontrol (beetle) rearing e q u i p m e n t

. Y E A R O N E / O N G O I N G

Strategic Action 5C: Id entify Pr io rity Marine and Freshwater Invasiv e Species for Management Actions

Issue add r es sed : Allo cation of lim ited resourc e s f o r AIS m a nagem e nt will requir e the ongoing designation of priority species. As this plan is im plem ented and m onitoring

45efforts enhanced, im proved knowledge of AIS di stribution and im pacts must be used to continually update m a nagem e nt priorities.

Task 5C1: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rk ing Group will develop protoco l s for additions an d deletions to the priority AIS lists and appoint a subcomm ittee of biologists with expertise in aquatic organism s to m a ke recommendations for list changes. The subcomm ittee will inclu d e representatives form t h e Massach usetts Invas i ve Plant Gro up, the Massachusetts Invertebrate Invasives a nd Biocontrols Group, a nd the Massachusetts
W i l d l i f e a n d P l a n t D i s e a s e s G r o u p

. Y E A R O N E

Task 5C2: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rki ng Group will work with the Natural Heritag e Pro g ram , academ ics and non-profit env i ronm ental organization s to develop protocols for developing a priority list of s ites for m a nage m e nt action each year in order to control marine and freshwater AIS

. Contro l of invasive species on sites where they coexist with f e deral o r state endanger e d a nd thre atened spec ies will cons titute high

p r i o r i t i e s f o r a c t i o n

. Y E AR ONE

Strategic Action 5D: Id entify and Di ssemina te Informa t ion on Existing
Control Mechanisms fo r Priority S p ecies

Issue add r es sed : Organizations involved in inva sive species managem e nt in Massachusetts m a y not be aware of the full ra nge of options available for the control of estab lished populations. Effective control of AIS with lim ited resources will require that the rang e of m echanical, chem ical, biological, an d other con t rol techn i que s are av ailab l e
to m a nagers of aquatic system s.

Task 5D1: ( D EP/DEM) DEM and DEP will compile inf o rm ation de tailin g available control techniques and technologi es for the m a na gem e nt of fr eshwater priority invaders in the "Guide to Lake and Pond Managem e nt in Massachusetts." DEP and DEM have dedicated $50,000 for the com p leti o n o f t h i s t a s k

. Y E A R O N E

Task 5D2: (DEM/EOEA) Through the Lakes and P onds Initiative, DEM is currently
im ple m enting dem onstration projects involvi ng, in part, the control of freshwater invaders. Massachusetts expects to cont ribute up to $440,000/year over the next three years to sup port th e im plem entation of t h e s e r e s t o r a t i o n e f f o r t s

. Y E A R O N E

Task 5D3: (DEM/EOEA) Through the Lakes an d Ponds Initiative, DEM will train municipalities and watershed groups in the use of techniques for the control of invasive species. L a k e s and Ponds Initiative S t a ff will carry out this tas k

. Y E A R T W O

Task 5D4: ( D EM) DEM will in clude guidance on the re introd uction of native spec ies a s

a com ponent of lake and pond restoration e fforts in the GEIR on eutrophication and control of aquatic vege t a t i o n

. Y E A R O N E / O N G O I N G

46Strategic Action 5E: Expand Funding for Local Invasive Species Management and Related Projects

Issue add r es sed : Municipalities and local organizati ons often take the lead in AIS

m a nage m e nt efforts, particularly in freshwat er environm ents. There is currently lim ited funding available from state and federal agen cies to support these control initiatives.

Task 5El: (DEM/EOEA) The EOEA and DEM will m a ke up to $250,000/year available

to m unicipalities and local m a nagers for la ke and ponds restoration m easures through the Lakes and Ponds Grant Progr am ( A p p e n d i x C )

. Y E A R T W O

Strategic Action 5F: Monitor and Document the Effectiveness of AIS Control
Efforts

Issue add r es sed : The effectiveness of AIS control efforts often goes unm onitored following implem e ntation. Refinem e nt of ex is ting techniques and developm ent of new

m a nage m e nt m easures will require th at the e ffectiveness of various con t ro l technolog ies are carefully docum ented and repor ted to appropriate user groups.

Task 5Fl: ( D EP) DEP will deve lop and includ e a m onitoring requir e m e nt with pe rmits for herbicide applicat ions to aquatic invasive plan ts granted through the Herbicide Licensing P r ogram . Massachusetts is seeki ng $ 20,000 over two years to support staff
tim e for the developm ent of this program co m p onent and $5,000/year in subsequent years for ongoing im ple m e n t a t i o n

. Y E A R T W O

Task 5F2: ( D EM/EOEA) DEM will m onitor th e ef f ectiven ess of AIS control ef f o rts through Lakes and Ponds Initiative dem onstratio n projects (identified as a need in the Lakes and Ponds General Environm ental Im pact Report). Massachusetts is seeking $5,000/year to develop a m onitoring program fo r dem onstration projects and oversee the

m o n i t o r i n g e f f o r t

. Y E A R T W O

Task 5F3: ( D EM) DEM will in clude a m onitoring requir e m e nt with gr ants distributed for AIS control under their Lakes and Ponds Grants Program . DEM has dedicated 0.1 FTE to the developm ent of a m onitoring requir em ent, associated protocols, and reporting

m echanism s

. Y E A R T W O

Task 5F4: ( W RP): W R P will contin ue to m onito r the ef f ectiv eness of their purple loosestrife biocontrol efforts. W R P i s seeking $18,000 over the next two years to purchase two Global Position i ng Sy stem s for mapping of lo osestrife populations.
ONGOING

Strategic Action 5G: Continue to Impl emen t Efforts to Control Esta blished Populations of Invasive Aquatic Macrophytes

47Issue add r es sed : Established nonindigenous aquatic m acrophytes continue to degrade Massachus etts freshwater system s. Contro l of these populations will be necessary to

m i ni m i ze ongoing ecological and econom i c im pacts.

Task 5G1: (Silvio O. Conte National Fish and W ildlife Refuge) The Connecticut River Watershed Invasive Plant C ontrol Initia tive ’ s water ches tnut partnership has been

contro lling water che s tn ut inf e sta tio ns f o r th ree years. Mechanical harvesting cost $80,000 in 1999 and $51,000 in 2000. An additio nal $5,000 was spent in 2000 on the support of staff involved in additional harv esting efforts and in support of a volunteer monitoring effort. Approxim a tely $44,000 was spent in 2001 on m echanical harvesting in Long Pond Cove. Resources have not b een secured beyond the 2002 field season. T o thoroughly clean the cove using m echanical and m a nual m e a n s, expected needs are $65,000 for 2003 and 2004, with decreasing but ongoing needs in subsequent years (approxim a t e l y $ 3 0

, 0 0 0 / y e a r )

. O N G O I N G

Object ive 6 : Education

Strategic Action 6A: Develop and Dist ribute Educational Materials Related to Regional Invasive Species Issues

Issue add r es sed : Continued education of the gene ral public and resource m a nagers regard ing th reats f r om AIS and as pr eventa tive m easure will be nece ssar y to lim it th e introduction and spread of aqua tic invaders to Massachusetts.

Task 6A1: (MIT Sea Grant) MIT Sea Grant will continue to m a intain and update the b i o i n v a d e r w e b p a g e ( h t t p : / / m assbay.m it.edu/ pg?/ExoticSpecies/MI T )

. M I T S e a G r a n t has dedicated $5,000/year to s upport a web m a n a g e r

. O N G O I NG

Task 6A2: (NE Regional Panel) The Northeast R e gional Panel will develop a web page that gives background infor m ation on the pane l and its activities, identifies priority invasive species concerns in the region, and communicates infor m ation housed in the Marine Invasive Species Data base identified in Task 2D1. Resources obtained through the national Sea Grant Office will be used to s upp ort staff time necess a ry to com p lete this

t a s k

. Y E A R T W O

Task 6A3: (EOEA/Lakes and Ponds Initiative) E O EA will continue to develop and

m a intain the Lakes and Ponds Strategy web page ( h t t p : / / w w w

. s t a t e

. m a.us/envir/water/index.ht m ) comm unicating the m i ssion and activities of the Lakes and Ponds Watershed Action St rategy. Staff acquired through the Lakes and Ponds Initiative will complete t h i s t a s k

. Y E A R ONE/ONGOING

Task 6A4: (AIS W o rking Group/CZM/DEM) Th e AIS W o rking Group will develop a slide p r esen tation that ou tlin es the AI S probl em and potential m a na gem e nt approache s

. YEAR ONE

Strategic Action 6B: Develop and Distribute Materials T a rgeted at Designated Priority AIS

48Issues add r essed : Assistance from the gene ra l pu blic will be necessa ry to lim it the spr ead of AIS and for effective mon itoring of priority invaders.

Task 6B1: (MIT Sea Grant) M I T Sea Grant and the Mass ach usetts Audu bon Society will distribute lam i nated "Hitchhiker I.D. Cards” de picting priority AIS to agency officials, coastal m a nagers, and the public. MIT Sea Grant has de dicated $25,000 for printing and
distribution costs and will dist ribute the identification card s early in 2002. Inform ation collected though this effort will be com p iled in the Marine Invader Database (see Task
2 D 1 )

. Y E A R O N E

Task 6B2: ( D EM) DEM will con tinu e to dis t r i bute "A Guide to Selected I nvasive Non

Native Aquatic Species in Ma ssachusetts" (Helquist, DEM, 2002). To date, DEM has expended $18,000 for printing and d i s t r i b u t i o n c o s t s

. Y E A R ONE

Task 6B3: (New England Aquarium /DEM) The New England Aquarium and the DEM will con tinu e to dis t r i bute "A Guide to Aqua tic Plants in M a ss achusetts” ( N ew England Aquarium a n d D E M

, 1 9 9 6 )

. O N G O I NG

Task 6B4: ( E OEA) EOEA will contract with a c onsultan t to design and f a bric ate a portab l e, in terac tive exh i bit on the p r oblem s a ssociated with AIS and how to prevent their introduction into lakes, ponds, rivers, and st ream s to be used in a variety of public settings. E O EA has dedicated $3,500 to th e developm ent of the e x h i b i t

. Y E A R O N E

Strategic Action 6C: Develop and Di stribute Mater i als T a rgeted at AIS Transport Vectors

Issue add r es sed : The diffuse nature of the AIS problem and the wide variety of transport vectors will require that res ource m a nagers, industry representatives, and the general public are infor m ed about potential pa thways of introduction and spread.

Task 6C1: ( C ZM/DFA/DFW ) CZM, DFA, and DFW will develop and d i str i bute a p o ster (series) explaining the h azards of releasing aqu a rium plants and anim als to Massachu s etts

waters. Massachusetts is seeking $10,000 for de velopm ent, printing, and distribution

c o s t s

. Y E A R O N E

Task 6C2: (CZM) The North Shore Office of CZM is currently developing a landscaping model promoting the use of native vegetati on and m a nagem e nt practices to im prove water qua lity and water quantity. The proje c t w ill includ e th e developm ent of educational m a terials an d a targ eted outreach strategy for encouragi ng the use of native species in water gardens. CZM has dedica ted $25,000 to the com p letion of this task.
YEAR ONE

Task 6C3: (MIT Sea Grant/M assport) MIT Sea Grant and Massport will distribute ballast water m a nagem e nt posters and brochur es availab l e fro m the California Sea Grant College Program along with other educationa l m a terials to repr esentatives of the

49commercial shipping industry. Massachusetts is seeking $10,000 to support printing and d i s t r i b u t i o n c o s t s

. Y E A R T W O

Task 6C4: ( D EM) The Departm e nt of Environmental Manag e m e nt will r e vise and distribute its “Stop the S p read of Invasive Species” poster at boat launches, bait and tackle shops, pet stores, and other locations. DEM has dedi cated $10,000 for printing and
d i s t r i b u t i o n c o s t s

. Y E A R O N E

Task 6C5: (AIS W o rking Group/EOEA): The AIS W o rking Group will coordinate with EOEA and other organizations to sponsor an invasive species booth at state and regional gardening exhibitions including the annual Boston Flower Show. Massachusetts is seeking $10,000/year to support travel expenses and printi ng and distribution costs.
ONGOING

Task 6C6: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rki ng Group will develop a presentation relating regional AIS m a nagem e nt issues to decision m a king bodies such as the Coastal
C a u c u s o f L e g i s l a t o r s

. Y E A R S T H R E E

- F I V E

Objective 7 : Research

Strategic Action 7A: Id entify Rese arch Priorities for Mass achusetts a nd the Region

Issue add r es sed : As AIS populations change in size and new invaders are introduced to Massachus etts, prio ritie s f o r m a nagem e nt will ch ange as will resea r ch nee d s. Ef f ective
AIS m a nagem e nt will re quire that re search p r io rities are revaluated pe riod ically, and that these priorities are recognized and addresse d by scientists and m a nagers in the region.

Task 7A1: (AIS W o rking Group/MIT Sea Grant) The AIS Working Group will spo n sor a biennial sy mposium of area researchers fo r the developm ent of regional AIS research priorities. A subcomm ittee of the AIS W o rking Group will d e velop a s c o p e for the

m eeting, estim a te resource needs, and identify potential funding sources f o r the research

sym posiu m

. Y E A R T W O

Task 7A2: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rk ing Group is seeking $20,000/year to support a graduate fellowship for AIS resear ch based on research priorities identified

t h r o u g h T a s k 7 A 1

. Y E A R T W O

Task 7A3: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rk ing Group will develop a strategy to communicate AIS research needs to the scie ntific community and research supporters.
YEAR ONE /ONGOING

50Object ive 8 : Legisla t io n

Strategic Action 8A: Evaluate Massac husetts’s Authority to Restrict the Introduction of Specific Aquatic Speci es Designated as Threats to the Ecology and Economy of the Commonw e alth

Issues add r essed : Curr en tly, Mas s ach usetts ’s au th ority to proh ibit the im port of potentially harmful plant, algal, and inverteb rate species is lim ited or unclear. In some

cases, s t ate agencies such as the DFA and DMF m a y wish to include new species as targe t s in ex isting inspec tion program s but do not have th e clear authority to expand existing lists.

Task 8A1: (CZM) CZM will contrac t with a law student to ev aluate Mass achusetts’s existing authority to prohibit the introduction and transport of AIS, particularly plant, algal, and invertebrate speci es designated as priorities by the AIS W o rking Group (see also Task 2J3). Massachusetts is seeking $10,000 to contract with a law student for one

sem e s t e r

. Y E A R T W O

Task 8A2: (AIS W o rking Group) Based on the re sults of Task 8A1, the AIS W o rking Group will d e velop a reg u latory strategy to lim it the introduction of priority species.
YEAR T W O/ONGOING

Strategic Action 8B: Make General Recomme ndations fo r Additional State and Federal Legisla t iv e Needs to Mini miz e Impacts fro m Invasive Species.

Issue add r es sed : As invasive species m a nage m e nt evolves in Massachusetts, additional legislative needs m a y be com e apparent.

Task 8B1: (AIS W o rking Group) The AIS W o rk ing Group will bienn i ally evaluate legislative and regulatory needs based on the re sults of im plem entation efforts outlined in the AIS Managem e n t P l a n

. Y E A R T W O / O N G O I N G

51

### V. Implementation Table

See insert.

52

### VI. Program Monitoring and Evaluation

Following subm ission of this m a nagem e nt plan to the Federal ANS Task Force, the A I S Working Group will gen e rate the firs t annual work plan based on tasks id entified in Section
IV. Success e s of the plan will be ev aluated each year by th e Working Group based b o th on progress in m eeting the goals outlined on page 2 as well as successful im plem entation of identif i ed ta sks. Due to the dif f i culty in a ssigning quantitative m e asur es of progress towards these goals, the AIS W o r k ing Group will evaluate plan im plem entation based prim arily on the

com p letion of specific tasks iden tified for each year (s ee Section V: Im plem entation Table).

e s u l t s o f t h e evaluation will be sum m a rized in an annual rep o rt th at will include: R

1) A qualita tiv e descr i ptio n of progres s towards ea ch of the f our goals ou tlined in Section
I. 2) A com p lete list of tasks identified in th e previous year’s work plan, budgetary needs identified for each, resou r ces pr ocured, and resources expended. 3) Designation of the im plem entation status (f ull, partial, or not implem e nted) of each task id entif ied in the p r e v ious year ’s work plan a nd a brief ju stif ica tion of the designation. 4) A summ ary of resource requi rem e nts to achieve full im plem e n tation of tasks listed as partially or not im ple m ented.

Evaluation of annual work plans will play a m a jo r role in directing activ ities for the following years, as well as restructuring tasks identified in the original plan. W o rk plans for upcom ing years will be produced concurren tly with each an nual program evaluatio n docum ent. Public

m eetings sim ilar to thos e descr i bed in Section I will be he ld to soli cit co mments on the draf t annual report and work plan prior to the distribu tion of a final docum ent to relevant state and federal agencies, m unicipalities, academ i cs, industry representa tives, and the general public.

53

### VII. Glossary

algae - organism s with no true roots, stem s, or le aves that rang e in size fro m single celled organism s to large, plant-like organism s

aquaculture - the contr o lled cu ltiva ti on and harvest of aquatic anim als and plants

aquatic

- relating to fresh or saltwater system s, including both open waters and wetlands

ballast w a ter - any wate r tha t is p l ac ed in the ho ld of a ship for the purposes of m a intaining stability

benthic - relating to the substrate (b ottom ) of a lake, pond, ocean, or o t h e r water bod ies, which often provide habitat for a variety of organism s

biogeographic region - the area defining the geographic boundary of organism s, determ ined by a com b ination of climate, water te mperature, or geologic boundaries

cryptogenic species - an organism of unknown origin; m a y be introduced or native

cultch - crushed shells deposited in a waterway to attract the spawn of r eef building sh ellf ish such as oysters

epibenthic - relating to organism s that exist exposed on the substrate (bottom ) of a lake, pond, ocean, or other water bodies

epiphyte - an organism that grows on another pl ant or anim a l upon which it depends for

m echanical support but not for nutrients

eradicate - to com p letely elim inate a population from a geographic area

exotic species - see nonindigenous species

fouling - en tanglem ent, clogging, or obstruction by an undesired organ i s m often resulting in dim i nished functioning of ships, intake pipes, and other subm erged equipm ent or m a chinery

hydrology - the study or description of the behavior of atm o spheric, surfa ce, or groundwater

invasive spe c ies ( i nvade r ) - nonindigenous or cryptogenic orga nism s that m a y threaten the diversity or abundance of native species or the ecological stability and/ or uses of infested

waters

macrophyte - a plan t tha t is visib l e with th e unaid ed ey e; generally used to refer to floating or rooted aqu a tic plan ts

54native - ex is ting with in a histor ica l ecological range, usually w ithin a balanced system of coevolved organism s

nonindigenous species - (non-native species) a species transported intentionally or acciden t ally from another region

nuisance species - (as defined by the federal A N S Task Fo rce) an im al and plant sp ecies that have been introduced into new ecosystem s thr oughout the U n ited States and the world and are having harm ful im pacts on the natural resource s in thes e ecos y stem s and the hum an use of these resources

pathogen - any agent th at caus e s dis ease in p l ants or anim als; typically referring to m i crobes such as bacteria, viruses, or protozoan parasites

parasite - an organism that grows, feeds, and is sh eltered on or in a diffe rent organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host

population - all indiv i d u als of a sin g le spec ies with in a defined habitat or geographic area such as a pond or watershed

propagules - any of various usually vegetative porti ons of a plant, such as a bud or other offshoot, that aid in dispersal of the species and from which a new individual m a y develop

seafood - any fish, shellf ish, or other aquatic sp ecies harvested for the purposes of hum an

consum ption

vector - the physical m e ans by which a species is transported from one area to another, usually referring to transport by humans

w a tershed - the geographic area that drains to a single water body or hydrographic unit such as a lak e , stream reach, or estuary

55

### Citations

Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force. 2000. ANS Task Force Guidance for State and
Inter s ta te A quatic Nuisa n ce Sp ecies Managem e nt Plans 44 pp.

Blake, Andrew. 2001. Sm all Crabs May Pose Big Threat. The Boston Globe . May 20, North W eekly p. 7.

Boerner, R.E. 1972. A Comparative Study of R e producti ve Patterns in Populations of Codium fragile subspecies tomentosoides off the Northeast C oast of North America

. M.Sc. Thesis, Adelphi University, N Y 69 pp.

Burke, Tina. 2001. Identifying Ballast W a ter Ma nagem e nt Practices in Massachusetts - A Step Toward Assessing the Risk of Shipboard Introductions of Aquatic Invasive Species into the W a t e rs of Massachusetts. A repor t to the Massachusetts Port Authority 15 pp.

Burkhead, N.M. and J. D. W illiam s . 1991. An intergeneric hy brid of a native m i nnow, the golden shiner, and an exotic m i nnow, the rudd. Transactions of the A m erican Fisheries So ciety 120:781-795.

Carlton, J.T. 1997. Marine Biol ogical Invasions of New Engl a nd: An Annotated Check List. Draf t r e port to the Steer ing Committee for Marine B i oinvasions; Massachusetts Sea Grant College Program . 5 pp.

Chavanich, S. and L.G. Harris. 2000. Pote ntial impact of the introduced bryozoan Membranipora membranacea , on the subtidal snail, Lacuna vincta , in th e Gulf of Maine. J. Pederson (ed.). Ma rin e Bioinvas io ns: Proceed ings of the F i rst Nationa l Conference

. MIT Sea Grant 00-2. pp. 157-163.

Coffin, G.W. and A.P. Stickney 1966. Codium enters M a ine waters. Fish eries Bu lle tin 66:159-161.

Cohen, A.N. and J.T. Carlt on. 1995. Nonindigenous Aquatic Sp ecies in a United States Estuary: A Case Study of Biological Invasi ons of the San Francisco Bay and Delta. Unpublished report to the US Fish and W ildlife Service, W a shington, D.C. and the National Sea Grant College Program , Connec ticut Sea Grant. NTIS Report No. PB96- 166525. 246 pp.

Counts, C.L., III. 1986. T h e Zoogeography and History of the Invasion of the United States by Corbicula flum i nea (Bivalv i a: Corb iculidae). Americ an Malaco lo gical Bulletin, Special Edition 2:7-39.

Crow, G.E. and C.B. He llquist. 2000. Aquatic and Wetland Plants of Northeastern North
America , Vol. 1 and 2. University of W i sconsin Press. Madison, W I

.

56Estrella, B.T

. and R.P. Glenn. 1999. Massac husetts Coastal Comm ercial Lobster Trap
Sa m p ling Program May-Nove m b er, 1999. Massac husetts Division of Marine Fisheries. Publication No. 18458-28-208. 20pp.

Executive O ffice of Envi ronm ental Affairs. 2002. Massachusetts Aquatic Invasive Species Managem e nt Plan Public Review and Comment Period. The Environmental
Monitor 57(8):31.

Ford, S.E. 1996. Range extension by the oyster parasite Perkinsus marinu s into th e northeastern United States: Re sponses to clim ate change? Journal of Shellfish Research
15:45-56.

Fraser, Doug. 2001. Black plague of clam s . Cape Cod Times . June 7, 2001. Archives: http://www.capecodonline.com / cctim es / a r c h i v e s / 2 0 0 1 / j u n / 7 / p l a g u e 7

. h t m

.

Freem an, A. and L.D. Sm ith, 1999. Grazing Pressure on Invasive and Endem i c Subspecies of the Green Alga Codium fragile . In: Judith P e derson (Ed.), Marine
Bioinvasion s : Proceed in gs of the F i rst Nationa l Conference January 24-27,1999 . MIT Sea Grant College P r ogram , Ca m b ridge. pp. 175-176

Fuller, S.L.H. and C.E. Powell. 1973. Range extension of Corbicula man ilens is (Philippi) in the Atlantic drainage of the United States. Na utilus 87:59.

Ganzhorn, J., J.S. Rohovec, and J.L. Fryer 1992. Dissem i nation of m i crobial pathogens through introductions and transfer s of finfish. Prepared for Dispersal o f

Living Organisms into Aquatic Ecosystems. Maryland S ea Grant Publication, C o llege Park, Maryland. pp. 176-192.

Harding, J. and R. Mann. 1999. Observations on the biology of the veined rapa whelk, Rapana venosa (Valenciennes, 1846) in the Chesapeake Bay. Journal of Shellfish
Research 18(1):9-17.

Harris, L.G. and A.C Mathieson, 1999. Patte rns of Range Expansion, Niche Shift and Predator Acquisition in Codium fragile ssp . tomtntosoides an d Membranipora
membranacea in the Gu lf of Maine. In: Judith Pederson (Ed.), Marine B i oinvasions: Proceedings of the First National Co nference Ja nuary 24-27 ,1999 . MIT Sea Grant College Program

, Ca mbridge. pp. 46-56

Harris, Larry G. and M.C. Tyrell 2001. Changing community states in the Gulf of M a ine: synergism between invaders, overfishing, and clim ate change. Biological Invasions 3:9-
21.

Hartel, K.E., D.B. Halliwell, and A.E. Launer. 199 6. An annotated workin g list of th e inland fishes of Massachusetts. Univer sity of Massachusetts, Ca m b ridge, MA.

57Hellquist, B.C. 2001. A Guide to Selected Non-N a tive Aquatic Species in Massachusetts

. Massachusetts Departm e nt of E nvironm ental Managem e nt. 18 pp.

Hickey, J.M. 1979. Culture of th e Pacific Oyster, Crassostrea gigas, in Massachusetts
Waters. Exo tic Spe cies in Maricu ltu re . Roger Mann, ed., MIT Press. ISP N 0-262-13155-
2.

Hsu, Tommy. 2000. A Hedonic Study of the Eff ects of Lake W a ter Clarity and Aquatic Plants on Lakefront Property Prices in Verm ont. Unpublishe d MS Thesis, University of Maine. August 2000, 91 pp.

Isom , B.G., C.F. Bowma n, J.T. Johnson, and E.B. Rodgers. 1986. Controlling Corbicula (Asiatic clam s) in com p lex power pl ant and industrial water system s. Ame r ican Malaco logic a l Bulle tin S p ecial Edition 2:95-98.

Langeland, K.A. 1996. Hydrilla ver tic illa ta (L.F .) Royle (Hydrocharitaceae), The
Perfect W e ed . Castanea 61:293-304.

Mackin, J.G ., and S.M. Ray. 1966. The taxonom i c relationships of Dermocystid ium
marinum Mackin, Owen, Collie r. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 8:544-545.

Makowka, J. 2000. Monterey Bay N a tiona l Marine Sanctuary Fact Sheet: Caulerpa taxifolia . Report to the Monterey B a y National Marine Sanctuary.

Massachusetts Coastal Z one Managem e nt. 1995. Aquaculture White Paper & Strategic Plan . 236 pp.

Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Managem e nt, 2001. Aquatic Nuisance Species Research an d Outreach : Northeast R e gional Ma rine Invad e r Database an d W e b Page. A Proposal to the Office of Sea Grant, Nati onal Oceanic and Atmospheric Adm i nistration, US Department of Comm erce.

Meinesz, Alexandre. 1999. Killer A l gae . University of Chicago Press. 1999. Chicago, IL. 360 pp.

Moe, M.A., Jr. 1964. Survival potential of piranhas in Florida. Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Sciences 27(3):197-210.

New England Aquarium and the Massachus etts D e partm e nt of Environm e n tal Managem e nt. 1996. A Guide to Aqua tic Plan ts in Massachuse tts 32 pp.

Ohio Sea Grant College Program , 2000. Aquatic Nuisance Species Report: An Update on Sea Grant Research and Outreach Projects . OHSU-TB-046. 240 pp.

Pacific States Marine Fisheries Com m i ssion, 2001 (adapt.). Pacific Oyster. [fact sheet

o n l i n e ] : S t r e a m N e t

. h t t p ://www.stream net.org/pub-ed/ ff/Lifehistory/index.htm l #

.

58Pederson, Judith (ed.) 2000. Marine Bioinvas ion s : Proceed in gs of the F i r

s t Nationa l Conference . MIT Sea Grant 00-2. 427 pp.

Pim e ntel D., L. Lach, R. Zuniga and D. Morrison. 1999. Environm ental and Econom i c Costs Associated with In vasive Species in th e United States. C o rnell University News
R e l e a s e

. h t t p : / / w w w

. n e w s

. c o r n e l l

. e d u / releases/Jan99/species_costs.htm l

.

Ragone C., L.M.W a lker, and J.G. Burre son. 1997. EM Occurrence of QPX, quahog parasite unknown, in Virginia hard clam s, Mercenaria mercenaria. Journal of Shellfish
Research 16:1(334).

Saltonstall, Kristin. 2002. Cr yptic Invasion by a non-native genotype of the comm on reed, Phrag m ites austra lis , into North Am erica. Proceedings of the Natio nal Academy of
Sciences 99:4(2445-2449).

Scheibling, R. 2001. Re cent Invaders Alter th e Kelp Bed Ecosystem Off Nova Scotia. Presentation to Second the Internationa l Conference on Marine Bioinvasions. New Orleans, LA.

Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge, 1999 . The Connecticu t River Watershed/L ong Island Sound Invasive Plant Control Initiati ve Strategic Plan.

Sm ith, L.D, J.T. Carlton, and J. Peders on. 1999-2001. Research and Outreach to Prevent and Control Aquatic Nuisance Species Invasi ons: Identification and Ranking of Transport Vectors of Marine B i oinvaders To and From New England: A Proposal to the Office of Sea Grant, National Oceanic and Atmosphe ric Adm i nistration, US Departm e nt of
Comm erce. 8 pp.

Thresher, R.E. 2000. Key Threats from Marine Bioinvasions: A Review of Current and Future Issues. J. Pederson (ed.). Marine Bioinvasions: Proceedi ngs of the First National Conference . MIT Sea Grant 00-2. pp.24-34.

US Geological Survey: Florida Caribbean Science Center. 2001. Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database. http://nas.er.usgs.gov/.

US Geological Survey. 2002. Non-indigenous a quatic species website. (Available from http://nas.er.usgs.gov/fishes/acc ounts/clariida/cl_batra.htm l ).

Washington SeaGrant. 2001. Aquatic Invasive Species: A Gu ide to Least Wanted Aquatic Organisms of the Pacific Northwest : W S G-MR 00-02. 8 pp.

Whitlatch, R

. B., and R.W. Osm a n. 1999. Geogr aphical Distributions an d Organism

Habitat Associations of Shallow-W a ter Intr oduced Marine Fauna in New England. J. Pederson (ed.). Marin e Bioinvas ion s : Proceed in gs of the F i r

s t Nationa l Conference

. MIT Sea Grant 00-2P. pp.61-65.

59W h itlatch, R

. B., R.W

. Osm a n, A. Frese, R. Ma la testa, P. Mitchell, and L. Sedgewick. 1995. The ecology of two introdu ced m a rine ascidians and th eir effects on epifaunal organism s in Long Island Sound. Proceedings o f

the Northea s t Conferen ce on NonIndigenous Aquatic Nuisance Species . Connecticut Sea Grant College P r ogram . CT-SG95-04. pp. 29-48.

W illiam s , A.B. and J.J. McDerm ott. 1990 An Eastern United States Reco rd for the Western Ind o -Pacific Crab, Hemigrapsus sanguineus (Crustacea: Decapo d a: Grapsid a e). Proceedings of the Bio l o g ical Society of Wash in gton 103(1): 108-109.

W illiam s , C.J. and R.F. McMahon. 1986. Power Station En trainm ent of Corbicula fluminea (Müller) in Relation to Population Dynam i cs, Reproductive Cycle and Biotic and Abiotic Variables. A m erican Ma lacolog i cal Bulletin , Special Edition 2:99-111.

W illiam s , J.D. 1997. Conservation s t atus of freshwater m u ssels: Fam ilies Margaritiferidae and Unionidae. Journal of Shellfish Research 16(1):327.

Wynn, S., L. Hess, and C. Liston. 1999. The Inva sion of the Chinese Mitten Crab And its Effect on Fish Protection F acilities. J. Pederson (ed.). Ma rin e Bioinvas io ns: Proceed ings of the First National Conference . MIT Sea Grant 00-2. p. 423.

P e r s o n a l C o m m u n i c a t i o n s
Hickey, J.M. Senior Biologist: Massac husetts Division of Marine Fisheries.

Sm ith, L.D. Assistant Professor. Departm e nt of Biological S c iences. Smith College.

60

### Appendices

### Appendi x A: Aquatic Invasi v e Spec ies Working Group Membership

Jay Baker Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Managem e nt 617-626-1204 jason.baker@state.m a

. u s 251 Causeway St., suite 900 Boston, MA 02114

Steve Block Massachusetts W e tland Restoration Program
617-292-5743 steve.b l ock @ state.m a

. u s One W i nter St., 5th floor Boston, MA 02110

Cynthia Boettner US Fish and W ildlif e Se rvice
413-863-0209 x. 6 cynthia_boettner@m a i l

. f w s

. g o v Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge
52 Avenue A Turners Falls, MA 01376

Jim Fair Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries
617-626-1534 jim .fair@state.m a

. u s 251 Causeway St., suite 600 Boston, MA 02114

Mike Gildesgam e Massachusetts Departm e nt of Environm ental Managem e nt Of fi ce of Wat e r Resour ces 617-973-8755

m i ke.gildesgam e @state.m a

. u s 251 Causeway St., suite 600 Boston, MA 02114

Deb Hadden Massport
617-946-4413 d h a d d e n @ M a s s p o r t

. c o m One Harborside Dr., suite 200S East Boston, MA 02128Sandra Keppner US Fish and W ildlif e Se rvice, Lower Great Lakes Fishery Resources Office
716-691-5456 x23

s a n d r a

_

k e p p n e r @ f w s

. g o v University Centre 405 North French Rd. suite 120a
Am herst, NY 14228

Taryn LaScola Massachusetts Departm e nt of Food and Agriculture
617-626-1779 taryn.lascola@state.m a

. u s 251 Causeway St., suite 600 Boston, MA 02114

Rick McVoy Massachusetts Departm e nt of Environm ental Protection
508-767-2877 richard.m cvoy@state.m a

. u s 627 Main Street Worcester, Massachusetts 01608

Brad Mitchell Massachusetts Departm e nt of Food and Agriculture brad.m itchell@state.m a

. u s 617-626-1771 251 Causeway St., suite 600 Boston, MA 02114

Paul Mucha US Coast Guard
617-223-6541

pm ucha@d1.uscg.m i l 408 Atlantic Ave. Boston, MA 02110

Judy Pederson Massachus etts Ins titu te o f Technology Sea Grant
617-252-1741 jpederso@m it.edu 292 Main St.
Ca m b ridge, MA 02142

Olga Quirin US Environm ental Protection Agency617-918-1542 quirin.olga@epam a i l

. e p a

. g o v One Congress St. Boston, MA 02114

Jan Sm ith Massachusetts Bays National Estuary Program

, 617-626-1231 jan.sm ith@state.m a

. u s 251 Causeway St., suite 900
Boston MA 02114

Susan Snow-Cotter Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Managem e nt 617-626-1202 susan.snow-cotter@state.m a

. u s 251 Causeway St., suite 900 Boston, MA 02114

Jim Straub Massachusetts Departm e nt of Environm ental Managem e nt 508-792-7716 x170 jim .straub@state.m a

. u s 131 Barnum Rd. Devons, MA 01432

Sally Yozell Battelle Corporation
781-952-5331 yozells@battelle.org
397 W a shington St. Duxbury, MA 02332

Marc Zimmerm an US Geological Survey
508-490-5021

m z i mmer m @ u s g s

. g o v 10 Bearfoot Rd. Northborough, MA 01532

### Appendi x B: Public Scoping M e etin gs: Question/C omment Su mm aries

Northeast Regional Conservation Commission Netw ork

1) Initial inte re st in th e “Fa c ilita ted DEP Herbicide Licensing P r ocess” (ref. Task 4C6).

a. Need to m a ke sm all weed control projects (i.e.. Phragmites ) which private landowners wish to undertake easier to get underway. b. Include readable guidance for the hom e owner/citizens for recomm ended

m a nage m e nt strategies to d eal with p r iority invad e rs.

c. Include conservation commissions in the discussion with DEP as the revised process is developed. d. Include additional technical assist ance during the herbicide licensing process. Th is could b e in the f o rm of perm itting tem p lates th at ar e ta ilor e d to spec if ic p r ojec ts (d ef ined by species to be con t rolled and th e size of the project).

2) General con cerns rais ed that the info rm ation generated through im ple m e n tation of the plan should be used to m a ke policy/legislation.

3) Integration with exis ting North Shore Program s.

a. CZM and the Conservation Comm is s i on Network are putting together a workshop for landscape architects ge ared towards use of plants for pollution prevention. T h ere was a str ong interest expressed in expanding this to inc l u d e invas i ve species, and expanding the program to include nurseries. b. Other ideas included developing edu cation a l m a teria l s th at c r eate dem a nd for local species and usi ng a m odel water garden.

4) Education: planning boards and conser vation comm issions need m o re general inform ation on the invasive species issu e i.e., docum entation of m a jor invasive species concerns and im pacts.

5) Wetlands Protection Act: General Consen sus that the W e tlands Protection Act could be used to prom ote/ m a ndate the use of na tive spe c ies a t new developm ents (with in the jurisdiction of the Act). This is som e thing we m i ght think about incorporating in the Plan. We m i ght better define what the role of conservation comm issions m i ght be.

6) Lakes and Ponds Initiative: Significant inte rest in the dem onstration projects. Is DEM looking for ideas for projects, or are the s i tes already selected ? How will the results of projects be translat ed to local decision m a kers?

7) Herbicid e a pplica tion : Need m o re inf o rm ation on the costs and be nefits or risks of pesticide applications.8) Other networks that m i ght be tapp ed into for im plem entation/education:

a. Harbor m a sters. b. Shellfish advisory boards (specifically Essex County).

9) Funding: Significant interest in the ne xt Lakes and Ponds grant rounds f o r local control projects (when? how m u ch? etc.).

Charles River Watershed Conservation Commission Netw ork

1) Need additional informati on on the relationships between water withdraw als or other draw down, changes in tem p erature and wate r chem istry, and the growth of invasive species (suggested this m a y be a component of the DEP/DEM GEIR).

2) Along the sam e lines— what im pacts do ot her lake and pond and wetland alterations (siltation, co ntam inant in puts) have o n aquati c weeds ? W ill th ese be add r essed in th e GEIR and related publications?

3) Major concern expressed over the spread of wetland species and m acrophytes from contractors. Include lan guage on invasive species prevention in a pending DEP publication on wetland m itigation. Need to de v e lop som e BMPs for use of vehicles (construction) in areas of AIS infesta tion— m a ybe expand on the boat wash station idea.

4) Need expressed for guidance in contro lling aquatic weeds and wetland invaders including:

a. Control techniques including m echanical h a rves ting and herb icide application. b. Disposal of rem oved m a terial.

c. Perm itting r e quirem e nts f o r sm all pr ojects.

5) Selection of Lakes and Ponds for LPI dem onstration projects

6) Outreach : Use local cab le televis i on networks.

Cape Cod Coastal Res o urces Commiss i on
1) Initial qu estions were po sed regardin g definition s : W hy did the AIS W o rking Group choose the term invasive? How is a sp ecies designated as invasive once it is designated as nonindigenous?

Discussion leaders explained tha t co mprehensive lists of spec ies were initially reviewed an d working group subco mmittees us ed the follo wing criteria to design ate prior i ties:a. Severity of the problem posed by the introduced species. b. Potential im pacts from m a naging the species (costs versus benefits).

c. Existing capabilities for m a nage m e nt

.

2) Questions posed regarding the scope of th e plan. W hy are water birds not included in the plan ?

It was explained that in discussing the scope of the plan, it was determ ined that efforts

to m a nage birds and m a mmals are alrea dy ex tens ive in M a ssa chusetts, and that control of these specie s would be handled thr ough existing program s.

3) Interest expressed in th e training of volunteer groups to do monitoring. Audience

m e mbers explained that it is not always clear what should be done with data once they are collected.

Existing data m a nage m e nt efforts such as the DE P aquatic m acrophytes database and the Northeast Regional P a nel databa se were explained in detail.

4) One audience m e mber suggested that e ducational m a terials be distributed during boater safety course. In addition instructor s (often m e mbers of the US Coast Guard) could be trained in invasive species issues and preventative measures, and that this inform ation be integrated into boating safety course curricula.

5) One audience m e mber suggested that a dr aft plan be placed in local lib raries during the public review period.

6) It was suggested that th e AIS W o rking Group increase comm unications with the Park Service, p a rticula r ly with regards to m a nage m e nt initiatives that have been undertaken at the Cape C od National Seashore.

South Coastal Watersh ed Team Meeting

1) Concern was imm e diately expressed over the lack of m a nagem e nt objectives and
action s tha t deal with co nstruc tion v e hi cles both transporting invasive organism s directly and creating disturba nces or other pathways by wh ich invasive species m i ght spread (construction m a nagem e nt actions have sin ce been in co rporated).

2) Additiona l c oncern was expressed o v er th e tran s port of invas i ve spec ies with f ill

m a terial.

3) Representatives of the landscape architect ure industry suggested that we distribute educational m a terials th rough the “New Engl and Grows” show, to reach the m a jority of industry representatives.

4) An audience m e m b er asked if we addre ss transport of AIS by waterfowl and if so how that m i ght be done. The participant was inform ed that this had not been addressed in the plan due to necessary lim itations in the scope of the plan.5) An audience m e m b er warned that we exercise caution in promoting the econom ic benefits of harvesting invaders due to the in terest that m a y be generated in protecting them

.

6) The watershed team leader suggested that we protect against the genetic dilution of shellfish stocks resulting from the in troduction of fast growing, genetically hom ogenous shellfish seed.

7) An audience m e m b er asked how groups would be contacted regarding Invasive Species Monitoring efforts through voluntee rs. T h e response was that volunteer monitoring groups will be solicited for their p a rticipation in the effort.

Additional interest was expresse d in reviewing the plan. The audience was inform e d that the plan will be posted on the CZM web pa ge following the next working group m e e ting
Oct. 25.

Lakes and Ponds Asso ciation (LAPA) West

1) How will the state agencies get funds to the pub lic to use on p r ojects for controlling or preventing Invasive S p ecies?

2) We are already working with DEM on invasi ve projects. W e re these counted as part of the plan ?

3) W ill the Lakes and Ponds W a tershed Action Strategy las t m o r e than th ree years ?

4) W ill im plementation of the Aquatic I nvasi ve Spe c ies Man a ge m e nt Plan result in a staff person dedicated to AIS m a na gem e nt issues in the regions?

5) W ill the Aquatic Invas i ve Species Ma nagem e nt Plan fund projects for Lake
Associations ?

SuAsCo W a tershed Conservation Commission Netw ork

1) How does the Aquatic Invasive Species Managem e nt Plan funnel $$ to the public?

2) How does the public get involved?

3) W ill new laws be developed f r om this ?

4) State ag encies m i ght consider reviewing laws from other states such as Maine.

5) Is there a public review process? W ho is the lea d f

o r this in itia tive ?

### Appendi x C: Grant Programs Applic able to Aquatic Invasive Species

Massachusetts

L a k e s a n d P o n d s Gra n t P r og r a m
Sp ons o r Age n c y : Depa rt m e nt of En vi ro nm ent a l M a na gem e nt Co n t act: Stev e A s en 6 17- 626 -1 353

ww w.st at e.m a .us/ dem / pro g ra m s / l a kepo nd/ l a keap p. ht m Elig ib ility: Mu n i cip a lities in conj un ction with o t h e r g r ou p s (watersh ed group s, o t h e r n onpr ofi t s , et c.)
Ove r vi ew: Awa rd s gra n t s fo r t h e p r ot ect i o n , prese r vat i o n a n d en ha nce m ent of p u b l i c l a kes

an d pon ds in the Co mm o n w ealth of Massachu s etts.
R a nge o f F u nd i ng: M a xi m u m of $ 1 0

, 0 0 0

. 00 Cost sharing: Yes, 50/50 Deadline: N/A

R i vers a n d Har b o r s Gra n t Pr o g ram
Sp ons o r Age n c y : Depa rt m e nt of En vi ro nm ent a l M a na gem e nt C ont act : Lesl i e Lewi s 78 1

- 7 4 0

- 1 6 0 0 x. 11 1

www.state.m a .us/dem / grants.htm Elig ib ility: Town s and m u n i cip a lities
Ove r view: Statewide program from the Of fice o f Wate rway s fo r t h e d e sign an d
i m p l e m en tatio n o f so l u tio ns t o ad dress co ast a l an d in lan d waterway p r o b l em s. R a nge o f F u nd i ng: M a xi m u m of $ 3 0 0

, 0 00 .0 0
C o st S h ari ng: Y e s, 50 /50 l o cal m a tch f o r

all pr oj ects ex cept d r edg i ng w h i c h r e qu ir es 25% lo cal m a tch Deadline: N/A

D i vi si o n of C o nser vat i o n Se r v i ces Gra n t P r og ram s

S p o n s or A g en cy: E x e c u tiv e O f fice o f E nvi ro n m ental Affai r s C ont act : ww w.st at e.m a .us/ dcs/ dcs g r n t

. ht m Elig ib ility: Massachu s etts co mm u n ities
Ove r vi ew: To pr o v i d e su p p o r t f o r pr oject s t h at p r ev en t po llu tio n, re store environm ental Qu ality and p r o t ect n a t u ral reso urces. R a nge o f F u nd i ng: M a xi m u m of $ 5 0 0

, 0 00
Co st Sh ari n g : Program s p r ovid e co mm u n ities with 52 %-70 % reim b u r semen t Deadline: June 1

A g r o

- E nv ir onmen tal Tech nolo g y G r an t Pr og r a m
Sp ons o r Age n c y : M a ssach uset t s Depa rt m e nt of Fo od an d A g ri cul t u re Co n t act: Cr aig Richov 5 08- 792 -7 711 x 1 4
14 2 Ol d C o m m on R o ad
Lan caster, MA 01 523 Elig ib ility: Pub lic and p r i v ate ag encies and o r g a n i zatio n s , bu si n e ss and i n du stry, ed u cation a l i n stitu tio n s , and l o cal Massach usetts g o v e rn m e n t Ov erv i ew: Inv itin g propo sals to fun d d e m o n s tratio n p r o j ects, feasib ility an alyses and applied rese arc h designe d to a d dress ag ricu ltu re related environ m en tal co ncern s

an d d e v e lop m en t n e ed s. At least on e g r an t has b e en u s ed recen tly for aq uatic weed control.
R a nge o f F u nd i ng: M a xi m u m of $ 5 0

, 0 0 0
A v er ag e g r an t la s t ye a r : $ 12, 50 0
C o st S h ari ng: No ne Deadline s : Decem ber 1 (2000)National Programs

P a r t n e rs fo r Fish a n d W i l d lif e Pr o g ram
Spons or Age n c y : United States Fish a n d W i l d life Service
Co n t act: Stev e Hill 4 13-253 -8 614
h ttp ://g ran t s.fws.go v Elig ib ility: Priv ate lan d own e rs Ove r vi ew: Of fers t ech ni cal and fi nanci a l assi st ance f o r t h e vol unt a r y re st orat i o n of wetlan d s an d oth e r fish and wild life h a b itats o n priv ate lan d . Enh a n ces reestab lish m en t o f n a tiv e v e getatio n an d ecolo g i cal co mm u n ities for b e n e fit o f fish and wild life in co n c ert with th e n e e d s a n d desi res o f pri v at e l a n d o w ner s

. R a nge o f F u nd i ng: N/ A
C o st S h ari ng: Yes, 5 0 / 5 0 l o c a l shari ng Deadline: N/A

P a r t ne rs hi p fo r W i l d l i f e
Spons or Age n c y : United States Fish a n d W i l d life Service
Co n t act: Gary Rein itz Gary _reinitz@ f ws .g o v Elig ib ility: Sate Ag en cies
Ov erv i ew: To p r ov id e gran ts to state projects that be ne fit a va ri et y of fi sh a n d wi l d l i f e
sp ecies an d / o r en cour ag e non- con s u m p tio n fish an d w ild life r ecr eati o n

o ppo rt u n ities.
R a nge o f F u nd i ng: FY 00 $ 7 6 8

, 0 0 0 a v ai l a bl e C o s t S h a r i n g : n o n e Deadline: N/A

R e g i on al Geograph i c In itiativ e
Sp ons o r Age n c y : US E n vi r onm ent a l Pr ot ect i o n Age n cy Co n t act: D e b H a r s ted 6 17- 918 -1 085

ww w.e p a. g ov/ regi onal / r gi

. h t m Elig ib ility: Co n t act Deb Harsted
Ove r view: Provi d es up to four years of “ s eed m oney” for projects t h at addres s a high hum an healt h or ecosystem risk (suc h as those associated with a quatic i n vasive

sp ecies) and h a v e si g n i fican t p o t en tial for risk redu ction

. Th ese proj ects will
foc u s on a plac e rathe r than a polluta nt. R a nge o f F u nd i ng: N/ A
C o st S h ari ng: no ne Deadline: All stages of th e proces s normally take place betwee n October a n d Janua r y.

W i l d life Hab i t a t In cen tiv es Prog ram
Sp ons o r Age n c y : US De part m e nt of A g ri c u l t u r e , Nat u ral R e s o u r ce C o n s er v a t i on Se r v i ce. Co n t act: Rick Dev e rg ilio Rick .d ev erg ilio @m a.u s d a .gov Elig ib ility: Own e rs, lan d l ord s , land op erato r s or ten a n t s Ov erv i ew: Prov i d es fin a ncial in cen tiv es to d e v e lop h a bitat fo r fish an d wild life on p r i v ate l a nds . T h e a g r e em ent ge neral l y l a st s 10 y e a r s. R a nge o f F u nd i ng: M a xi m u m of $ 1 0

, 0 0 0

. 0 0 pe r cont ract C o st S h ari ng: Yes, US D A pa y s up t o 7 5 % Deadline: None, apply at local USDA OfficeW a ter s h e d Pr otectio n an d Floo d Prev en tion

Sp ons o r Age n c y : US De part m e nt of A g ri c u l t u r e , Nat u ral R e s o u r ce C o n s er v a t i on Se r v i ce Contact: Carl Gustafs on Car l .Gu s taf s on@m a .u sd a.g ov Elig ib ility: An y state ag ency, cou n t y, t o wn, m u n i cip a lity, d i strict, n on-pr ofit, trib e o r group with au tho r ity u n d e r state law
Ove r vi ew: Assi st ance f o r m a i n t e nance a n d o p e r at i o n o f wat e rs he d wo r k s of i m prove m e nt

, in clu d i n g wil d life h a b itat i m p r ov em en ts. Ran g e of Fun d in g : Pr oj ects ov er $5 m i l lio n r e qu ir e co ng r e ssional ap pro v a l
C o st S h ari ng: Yes, va ri es Deadline: Check with cont act f o r dea d line fo r 20 0 1

N o r t h A m erican Wetlan d s Con s erv a tion Gran ts

Spo n s or Ag en cy: US Fish and Wild life Serv ices
Co n t act: Reg i on al: An drew Millik en , an drew_ m ill ik en @fws.gov Natio n a l: Bettin a Sp a r r o w e , B e t t i n a_ sparro we@fws.go v (Stand ard Gran ts) Keith M o reh ouse, k e ith

_ m o r eh ou se@fws.gov (Sm a ll Grants) Elig ib ility: An y i n d i v i du al or g r o u p Ove r view: Provi d es assist ance for long-t erm c onser vat i o n ef fo rt s di rec t ed t o war d wet l ands

t h r o u g h habi t a t p r ot ect i o n, res t orat i o n, or e n h a ncem ent

. The p u r p ose of t h e
gra n t i s t o en co ura g e v o l u nt ar y , p ubl i c

- p ri va t e part ners hi ps t o co nse r ve we t l a nd

eco system s. Orig in ally estab l ish e d to h e lp su ppo rt t h e North Am erican
W a ter f ow l Man a g e m e n t Plan so m a n y of the app r ov ed pr oj ects invo lv ed b i rd
h a b itat preservatio n

. App lican ts work i n g wi th inv a siv e sp ecies m a y wan t to hi g h l i ght t

h e i m port a nce of n a t i v e speci es i n ha bi t a t rest o r a t i on. R a nge o f F u nd i ng: St anda r d : up t o one m i l l i on Sm a ll Gran ts: Up to $5 0,000 .0 0
Co st Sh ari n g : 5 0 / 5 0 sp lit, co st sh ari n g Deadl i n e: St anda r d : M a r c h 23 an d Jul y 6, 2 0 0 1
Sm a ll Grants: Decem ber 1, 2001

C o astal W e tland s Plann i ng , Pro t ectio n , an d Resto r ation Act Program

Spo n s or Ag en cy: US Fish and Wild life Serv ices
Co n t act: Su e Essig 4 13- 253 -8 611

sue

_ essig@fws@gov
30 0 West gat e C e nt er Dr

. Hadl ey , M A 0 1 0 3 5

- 9 58 9

Elig ib ility: Co astal states in clud ing the lak e reg i o n , Gu am , US Virg in Islan d s , Pu erto Rico

, C o m m onweal t h of t h e N o rt he rn M a ri ana Isl a nds , t h e T r ust Terri t o ri es of t h e Pacific Isla nds , and Am erica Sam o a Ove r vi ew: Pro v i d es fu n d s t o assi st i n pu r s ui n g c o ast a l wet l a nd co nse r vat i o n p r oject s

. Fun d s can b e used f o r acqu isitio n of land s or w a ter s and f o r

r e stor atio n,

en h a n cem en t or m a n a g e m e n t o f co astal wetlan d ecosyste m . Prog ram s will

pr o v i d e fo r l o n g

- t e rm conser vat i o n o f s u c h l a nds an d t h ei r hy d r ol ogy , wat e r
q u a lity and fish an d wild life.
Fu ndi ng: FY 00 $ 1 1

. 8 m i l l i on Co st Sh ari n g : Gran t will p r ov id e b e tween 50 -75 % Deadline: June 8

A q u a t i c R e s o u r c e E ducati o n
Spons or Age n c y : United States Fish a n d W i l d life Service
Co n t act: Gary Rein itzG a r y _reinitz@ f ws .g o v Elig ib ility: State ag encies
Ove r vi ew: Thr o ug h t h e S p o r t Fi s h i n g R e st orat i o n Act

, st at es are rei m bu rse d fo r a q u a t i c

reso u r ce e duca t i on pr o g ram s wi t h bu d g et s t h at do not exce ed 15% of t h e t o tal state sport fis h i n g rest oration funds.
Fu ndi ng: The Sp ort Fi sh i ng R e st orat i o n f u n d s c o m e fr om t a xes o n fi s h i n g e qui pm ent and

m o to r bo at fu el tax e s. C o st S h ari ng: St at es m u st cont ri b u t e a n y a m ount ab ove t h e am ount a v ai l a bl e t h r o ug h t h e S p ort Fi shi n g R e st or at i on F u nd s. Deadline: Ongoing

W e t l a n d s Rese rve Pr o g ram
Sp ons o r Age n c y : US De pt . of A g ri c u l t u re, Nat u ral R e s o urce C onse r vat i o n S e rvi ce Co n t act: Rick Dev e rg ilio Rick .d ev erg ilio @m a.u s d a .gov Elig ib ility: State, priv ate, asso ciatio n, any leg a l en tity th at h a s o w n e d th e land for at l east

one y ear. Ov erv i ew: Th is is a vo luntary p r og ram to p r ov id e fin a ncial in cen tiv es to rest o r e and p r o t ect wetlan d s in exch ang e fo r retiring m a rg in al ag ricu ltu ral lan d . Land own e rs may sell a conserva tion easem ent or enter into a cost-s hare rest oration a g re ement. Land own e rs vo lun t arily li m i t fu tu re use o f t

h e land , bu t retain priv ate

ow ne rshi p. La nd o w ne rs a n d t h e NR C S deve l op a pl a n fo r t h e rest o r at i o n and
main ten a n ce o f th e wetlan d . Th is restoration m a y in clu d e th e con t ro l an d

pre v e n t i o n o f i nva si ve s p eci e s

. Fu ndi ng: B a sed on acrea ge, n o t f

u ndi ng l e vel s ; F Y 0 0 1 5 0

, 0 0 0 ac res Co st Sh ari n g : USDA will prov id e 75 % un less own e r op ts fo r p e rm an en t easem e n t , in which case the USDA purc hases t h e land Deadl i n e: C ont i n u ous si g n

- u p

W e t l a n d s Program Dev e lop m en t Gran ts

Sp ons o r Age n c y : US E n vi r onm ent a l Pr ot ect i o n Age n cy C ont act : St aff o r d M a di s on M a di so n.St a f f o r d @e pa. g ov

www.e p a. gov/ owow/waters h ed/academ y/fund/ wetlandsp.htm Elig ib ility: States, trib es, l o cal gov ern m e n ts, i n tergov ern m en tal o r g a n i zatio n s Ove r vi ew: Pro v i d es fi na n c i a l assi st ance t o s u p p o rt dev e l opm ent of ne w, or a

ugm ent a t i on

an d enh a n cemen t of ex isting wetlan d progra m s . Projects m u st clearly d e m o n s trate a d i rect link to an in crease i n t

h e p a rticip an t’s ab ility to p r o t ect its

wet l a nd res o ur ces. Fu ndi ng: FY 00 $ 1 5 m i lli on Co st Sh ari n g : Gran t will p r ov id e 75 % Deadline: Varies

B r i n g Back th e Nativ es Gran t Program

Spo n s or Ag en cy: Natio n a l Fish an d W ild life Fou n d a tion
C ont act : ww w. nf w f

. o r g / p r o g r am s.htm
No rt heast R e gi on co nt act : E r i c Ham m erl i ng (2 0 2 ) 8 5 7

- 61 6 6 ham m e rl i ng@ nf wf .o rg Elig ib ility: Lo cal g o v e rn m e n t s, states, and lo cal no nprofit o r g a n i zations
Ove r vi ew: Assi st s i n rest o r i n g dam a ged or de gra d e d ri v e ri ne ha bi t a t s and t h ei r nat i v e aquat i c s p eci es t h r o ug h wat e r s he d re st orat i o n a n d i m prove d l a n d m a nage m e nt

. Fu ndi ng: FY 00 $ 4

. 5 m i l l i on C o st S h ari ng: No Deadline: None, applications acce pted t h rough t h e yea rF i ve St a r R e st orat i o n Pr og ra m
Sp ons o r Age n c y : US E n vi r onm ent a l Pr ot ect i o n Age n cy Contact: US E P A Offic e of Wetlands

, Oceans a n d Watershe ds
2 02- 260 -8 076

p a i

. j o hn @e pa. g o v Elig ib ility: An y pu b lic o r p r i v ate en tity th at eng a g e s i n co mm u n ity b a sed restoratio n Ov erv i ew: EPA prov id es fund s to fou r i n term ed iary o r g a n i zation s , the Nation a l Asso ciatio n

o f

Cou n ties, the Nation a l Fish and W i l d life Fo und atio n, the W i l d life Hab i t a t C o u n ci l an d t h e Nat i o nal A s s o ci at i on o f Se r v i ce an d C o nse r vat i o n C o r p s. These

ag en cies th en ad m i n i ster su b g r an ts to su ppor t co mm u n ity- b ased w e tlan d an d
ri pari a n rest o r a t i on pr o j ect s t h at em pha size l o ng te rm ecological, educational, and/ or soci o-ec on om i cal bene fi t s t o a wat e rs hed

. Pr o j ect s m u st i n cl ude m u lt i p l e part ners ( vol un t eer g r o u p s, co rp orat i o ns , pri v at e l a n d o w ner s , g o v er nm ent

, nonprofits, etc.).
Fu ndi ng: FY 00 $ 5 0 0

, 0 0 0

. 00
S u b g r an ts av er a g e is $10 ,0 00. 00
Co st Sh ari n g : No, info rm atio n an d technical support exc h a nge nece ssary. Deadline: January/ Fe bruary

W a t e r s hed Ass i stance Grants

Sp ons o r Age n c y : US E n vi r onm ent a l Pr ot ect i o n Age n cy C ont act : Of fi ce o f Wet l a nd s, Ocea ns a n d W a t e rshe ds Ariel Rio s Bldg

. 1 200 Penn sylvan ia Av e., NW
W a sh ing t on , DC 204 60
2 02- 260 -4 538
C o l e

. j a m e s @ e p a

. g o v Elig ib ility: Nonp ro fits, trib es, lo cal g o v e rn m e n t s Ove r vi ew: Fu nds are p r ov i d ed t o s u pp ort o r ga ni zat i onal de vel o pm ent and capaci t y bui l d i n g fo r wat e rs hed part ners hi ps wi t h di verse m e m b ershi p

. T h e EPA est a bl i s h e s a relatio n s h i p wi th on e or m o re elig ib le en tities to sup p o r t wat e rsh e d p a rtn e rsh i p ,
or ga ni zat i onal devel opm ent a n d l o ng t e rm effect i v enes s. Fu ndi ng: M a xi m u m fun d s fo r on e part ners hi p: $ 3 0

, 0 0 0

. 0 0
C o st S h ari ng: M a t c h i s enc o u r age d b u t n o t r e qui red Deadline: Varies

C o m m unity-Based Re st orat i o n P r o g r am
Sp ons o r Age n c y : Nat i onal Ocea ni c an d At m o sphe ri c Adm i ni st rat i on C ont act : US De part m e nt of C o m m erce Nat i onal Ocea ni c an d At m o sphe ri c Adm i ni st rat i on Office of Hab itat Co n s erv a tion

, FHC 3
1 315 East -W est H i gh w a y Silv er Spr i ng , MD 2 091 0
3 01- 713 -0 174

c h r i s.do ley@no aa.g o v Elig ib ility: State, territorial, lo cal, o r trib al g o v e rn m e n t s; reg i on al gov ern m en tal b o d i es;
p u b lic or p r i v ate ag en cies or o r g a n i zatio n s ; u n i v e rsities and co lleg e s; p r i v ate and

no n p r o fi t or ga ni zat i ons O v erv i ew : Pr ov i d es f und s fo r sm all-scale, lo cally driv en h a b itat rest o r atio n p r oj ects t h at fo ster n a tu ral resou r ce steward s h i p with in co mm u n ities. Partn e rsh i p s are so ugh t at th e n a ti o n a l an d lo cal lev e l to con t ri bute funding, land, t echnical assist ance,

wo rk f o rce su p p o r t

, or ot her i n

- k i n d se r v i ces. T h e pr o g ram em phasi zes t h e useof a grass r oot s, b o t t o m

- up a p p r oac h t o re st ori n g fi s h ery ha bi t a t across coast a l
Am erica.
Fu ndi ng: FY 00 u p t o $ 2 m i l l i on Co s t Sh a r in g : G r an ts ar e co op e r a tiv e a g r e eme n ts

, no s e t co s t

- s h a r i n g r a tio Deadline: As posted on t h e N OAA w e b site

F e d e ral Ai d in W i l d life Restoratio n
Spo n s or Ag en cy: US Fish and Wild life Serv ice
C ont act : The Di vi si o n o f Fe deral Ai d
F w 9_ Fede ral

_ Ai d @ f w s. go v Elig ib ility: State ag encies
Ove r vi ew: Di st ri b u t e d t o st at es t o p r ovi d e f u n d i n g fo r t h e sel ect i o n, re st orat i o n, i n f o r

m at i on
pr o duce d by t h ese p r o j ect s. “Teamin g with W i l d life” is one of th e W ild life
R e st orat i o n pr og ram s t h at m a y be a ppl i c a b l e f o r i nva si ve s p eci es wo rk

. Fu ndi ng: Fu nds are de ri ved f

r om an 11 pe rcent fed e ra l t a x o n sp ort h unt i n g g u n s ,
a m m u n itio n , an d ar ch er y equip m en t an d a 10 p e r c en t tax on h a ndg un s. Th e

am ount ea ch state receives is determ ined by a form ula cons idering t h e tota l area
of

t h e st at e a n d t h e num ber of l i censed h unt e r s in t h at state. The state c o vers the
f u ll co st of an y app r ov ed pr oject an d th en app lies fo r r e im b u r sem e n t th roug h Fede ral Ai d.
Co st Sh ari n g : State m u st p r ov id e 25 %, Federal will supp ort 75 % Deadl i n e: Pro g r am depen d ant

, em ai l above a d d r ess f o r det a i l s

C h allen g e Gran ts

Spo n s or Ag en cy: Natio n a l Fish an d W ild life Fou n d a tion
Co n t act: Eric Hamm erli n g ham m e rl i ng@ nf wf .o rg Elig ib ility: Fed e ral, state, an d lo cal g o v e rn m e n t s, edu c atio n a l in stitu tion s , no nprofit

or ga ni zat i ons Ove r vi ew: Awa rd s f u nd s fo r pr o j ect s t h a t pr om ot e spec i e s an d habi t a t con s er vat i o n t h at involve m u ltiple com m unity partners a n d ha ve an e v aluation com pone nt t o project outcom es. Fu ndi ng: M o st awa r ds a r e bet w ee n $2 5

, 0 0 0

- $7 5, 0 0 0 wi t h s o m e sm al l gra n t s an d so m e

ove r $ 1 5 0

, 0 00 Cost Shari ng: Non-fe deral dollars or goods a n d services of equal value m u st m a tch each dollar awarde d. Parti c ipants a r e e n c o ura g ed to ac hieve at least a 2:1 ratio for ea ch fede ral d o llar. Deadl i n e: R e vol vi n g a ppl i cat i on p r ocess wi t h B o ar d o f Di rect o r s deci s i ons m a de Oct obe r 31 an d M a rch 31

P u llin g To g e t h er In itiativ e
Spo n s or Ag en cy: Natio n a l Fish an d W ild life Fou n d a tion
Co n t act: G a r y K a n i a 2 02- 857 -0 166
k a n i a @ n f w f

. o r g Elig ib ility: Fed e ral ag en ci es, state and l o cal g o v e rn m e n t s, priv ate lan d o w n e rs Ove r vi ew: Pro v i d es fu n d s su pp o r t i n g pa r t ners hi ps i n de vel o pi n g l o n g -t erm weed

m a nagem e nt p r o j ect s wi t h i n t h e sc o p e of i n t e grat e d pest m a nagem e nt st ra t e gy

. Th e go als of t h e in itiativ e are to (1 ) prev en t, man a g e o r erad icate inv a siv e and

no xi o u s pl a n t s t h r o u g h a c o or di nat e pr o g ram o f pu bl i c / p ri v a t e part ners hi p s ; an d (2) inc r ease public awa r enes s of the a d ve rse i m pact s of i n va si ve a n d n o x i o us pl ant s

. Fu ndi ng: C ont act Gary Kani a C o st S h ari ng: Yes, fe deral m oney m u st be m a t c hed by st at e, l o cal or p r i v at e fu n d s Deadline: Contact Gary KaniaC o a s t a l O c e a n Program s
Sp ons o r Age n c i es: Depa rt m e nt of C o m m e rce C e nt er fo r S p o n so re d C o ast a l Ocea n R e sea r ch/ C oast al O c e a n P r og ram (CSCOR/COP), National Oce a n Se rv ice (NOS), National Oceanic a n d
At m o spheri c A d m i ni st rat i on ( N O A A )
Co n t act: Leslie McD onald 3 01- 713 -3 338 ex

. 13 7 CSCOR/COP Gran ts Ad m i n i strato r Elig ib ility: All qu alified no n-fed e ral and fed e ral re search ers. Particip an ts m u st b e affiliated with a no n-p r ofit in stitu tio n. Ov erv i ew: Prov i d es p r ed i c tiv e cap ab ility fo r m a n a g i ng co astal eco syst e m s th roug h

spo n s o r s hi p of researc h

. C O P su pp o r t s re sea r ch on iss u es c r itical to estuaries, coastal wate rs, and Great La kes and tra n slat es findings int o accessi ble
in fo rm atio n

. Fu ndi ng: Ave r a g e bet w e e n $5 ,0 0 0

- 5 00

, 0 0 0
FY 00 $ 8

. 5 m i l l i on Cost Shari ng: No cost sha r ing requirem ents Deadline: Check speci fi c funding a n nouncem ents

Research Grants

MIT Sea Grant Request for Proposals

S p o n s or A g en cie s : MI T S e a Gr a n t P r o g r a m Co n t act: Rich ar d Mor r i s 6 17- 25 2-7 042

r g m o rris @ m i t

. e d u Elig ib ility: Facu lty and sen i or research ers at un iv ersities and co lleg e s an d sen i o r research ers
at n on- pr of it org a n i zation s Ov erv i ew: So licitatio n for propo sals th at ad dres s the res earch nee d s i d entified by MIT Sea
Gran t in th e fo l l o w ing fo ur the m es: 1 ) C o astal Man a g e m e n t an d Utilizatio n 2) C o upl e d Oc ean Ob ser v i n g and M o del i n g 3) M a ri ne B i ot echn o l o gy , a n d 4) Tech ni cal D e vel o pm ent

. T h i s i n cl udes p r op osal s f o r re g i onal pr o j ect s a n d t h e Ad vi so ry Se r v i ces an d E d ucat i onal P r og ram

. Fu ndi ng: M a xi m u m annual f u ndi ng pe r resea r ch p r o j e c t : $7 5, 00 0. M a xi m u m annua l funding for education and outreach proj ects: $25,000
Sha r i n g: 50/ 50 Dead lin e: Prelimin ary Pro p o s als: Mar c h 20 01
Fu ll Pr opo sal: Mar c h 20 02

A q u a t i c N u i s a n ce Species Re search and Outreach

Sp ons o r Age n c i es: Nat i onal Sea G r ant Pr og ram , Nat i onal Ocea ni c an d At m o sphe ri c Adm i ni st rat i o n , De pa rt m e nt of C o m m erce Co n t act: Leon M. Cam m en , Aqu a tic Nu isan ce Sp ecies Co ord i n a tor, Nation a l
Sea Gran t Co lleg e Pro g ram , NOAA
1 315 East -W est H i gh w a y Silv er Spr i ng , MD 2 091 0
Or contact loca l program dire ctor MIT Sea Grant Direct or: Chryss ostom o s Chryss ostom o sidis chry s @ desl a b

. m i t

. eduElig ib ility: An y i n d i v i du al, pub lic or p r ivate co rpo r ation or p a rtn e rsh i p o r o t h e r asso ci atio n

o r

en tities (in c l u d i n g in stitu tion s o f h i g h e r edu catio n, institu tes, non -fed eral lab o rato ries), or an y State or po litical su bd iv i s io n of th e state or ag en cy. O v erv i ew : Pr ov i d es sup por t to p r oj ects to pr ev en t an d / o r con t ro l non indig e no us sp ecies
i nvasi ons i n al l US m a ri ne wa t e rs, t h e G r eat Lakes, an d Lak e C h am pl ai n. Proj ects will be selected throu g h n a tion a l co m p etitio n s

. Fun d i n g : I n FY 200 1 and 2 002

, $2 ,7 00,00 0 p e r year C o st S h ari ng: 50/ 50 Deadline: Novem b er 15

Im prove d M e t h o d s f o r B a l l a s t W a t e r Treat m e nt an d M a na g e m e nt and P r e v ent i o n o f Sm al l B o at Tra n s p ort f I nva si ve Sp eci es o
Sp ons o r Age n c i es: Nat i onal Sea G r ant Pr og ram , Nat i onal Ocea ni c an d At m o sphe ri c Adm i ni st rat i o n , De pa rt m e nt of C o m m erce and Fish a n d W i ldlife Services, Depa rt m e nt of t h e I n t e ri o r Co n t act: D r . Leo n Cammen 3 01- 713 -2 435x 136 l e on.cam m e n@n o aa. g o v

w w w. ns go .sea gra n t

. or g/ resea r ch/ n o n i n di ge n ous/ R F P 0 0

. h t m l Elig ib ility: An y p e rson m a y ap p l y. App licatio n s fro m n o n -fed e ral and elig ib le fed e ral

ap p lican ts will b e co m p eted ag ain s t each o t her. Non

- fed e ral ap p lican ts wil l b e f und ed th rou gh a pro j ect g r an t or co op er ative agreem ents and fede ral agenc i es will b e fund ed th ro ugh an in ter-ag e n c y t r an sfer.
Ove r vi ew: Pro v i d e s u p p o r t t o p r oject s t o im pro v e bal l a st wat e r t r e a t m ent an d m a nage m e nt in the C h esa p e a ke Bay a n d Great Lakes in particu l ar (Sea Gran t) and in US

co astal and Great Lak e s waters in g e n e ral ( S er v i ce). A l so t o su ppo r t pr oj ects to reduce t h e tra n sport of invasive s p ecies by s m all boats.
Fun d i n g : FY2 000 Sea Gr an t: $ 700 ,0 00
Serv ices: $300 ,0 00
Sea Gran t fo r small b o a ts: $40 ,0 00
Co s t Sh a r in g : N o t sp e c i f i ed in th e gr an t Deadline: Check we b site for c u rre nt dea d line

B i ol ogy of W e edy an d I nvasi ve Pl a n t s
Spons or Age n c y : NRI, Cooperat ive State Resea r ch

, E ducat i o n and E x t e nsi o n Ser v i ce, Depa r t m e nt of

A g ric u lture
Co n t act: Pr ogr am D i r ecto r 2 02- 401 -6 466

a p a r k @ r e e u s d a

. g o v Elig ib ility: An y o n e O v erv i ew : Pr ov i d es sup por t to researc h t h at leads to a n im p r ov ed und er stand i ng o f the

ex ten t o f g e n e t i c an d ph en o t y p ic d i v e r s ity with in and b e t w een p l an t p opulatio n s , sp ecies co m p o s itio n with in a co mm u n ity, an d o r sp ecies com p et itiv en ess an d
i nvasi venes s

. The pr o g ram al so s u p p o rt s p r op osal s ai m e d at un de rst a n d i n g pl ant po p u l a t i o n dy nam i cs and i n t e rac tio ns b e tween ag ricultu ral settin g s an d
lan d s of co nserv a tio n. Supp ort will also b e giv e n t o d e v e l o p m en t o f n e w

m e thods of c o ntrolling t h e s p read wee d s or i nva sive plants.
Fun d i n g : FY2 001 $ 300 ,0 00 ov er 3- 4 year s Co s t Sh a r in g : N o t sp e c i f i ed in th e gr an t Deadl i n e: No vem b er 15

, 20 0 0 , c h ec k w e b si t e f o r c u r r e nt dea d l i n e

### Appendi x D: Summary of Research Activities



### General

James T. Carlton
W illiam s College jcarlton@william s.edu

Dr. Carlton has worked extensively on aqua tic invasive species in New England and around the world. His publications and acco m p lishm ents co ver a wide range of expertise, focusing on dispersal vectors, ecolo gical and evolutionary im pacts, comm unity structure, and m a nagem e nt a nd prevention issues relevant to aquatic invasive species. Currently, h e is working with L. David Sm ith, Shannon W illard, and Judith Pederson on an investigation into the transport vectors of New England. He is the founding editor in Chief of the new interna t ional jou r nal Biological Invasions and was Co-Chair of the Marine Biodiversity Committ ee of the National Academ y of Sciences, w h ich produced Understanding Marine B i odiversity: A Research Agenda for the Nation (1995).

Carlton is a m e mber of t h e Steering Co mm ittee of the UN Global Inv a sive Species Program (GISP), and was Chair from 1991 to 2000 of the W o rking Group on Introductions and Transfers of Marine Orga nism s of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). He has tes tified five tim es on intr oduced species issues before Senate and House subcomm itt ees, and wa s Principal Investigator of the "Shipping Study" m a ndated under 1990 federal law. In April 1999 Dr. Carlton was the first scientist to receive the US Governm e nt' s interagency Recognition Award for Significant and Sustained Contributions to the Preventi on and Control of Noni ndigenous Species in
Am erica' s Aquatic Ecosystem

.

Representative Publications: Carlton, J.T. and J.B. Geller. 1993. Ecologi cal roulette: The gl obal transport of nonindigenous m a rine organism s. Science 261:78-82

Carlton, J.T. 1996. Marine bioinvasions: th e alteration of m a rine ecosystem s by nonindigeno us species. Oceanograp hy 9:36-43

Carlton, J.T. 1996. Pattern, process, and prediction in m a ri ne invasion ecology. Biological Conservation 78:97-106

L. David Smith
Sm ith Colle ge ldsm ith@lynx.neu.edu

Dr. L. David Sm ith’s research is actively exam ining two aspects of m a rine biological invasions in the Gulf of Maine. One resear ch direction examines dispersal pathways of nonindigenous m a rine species. Nonindigenous species arrive by num e rous pathways, yetwe know little about: (a) the iden tity, frequency or qua ntity of organism s being transported by a given pathway, (b) factors th at m a ke certain regions susceptible to invasion, or (c) the potential fo r invaders to continue to spread within a region. His research addresses these issues for both shipping (ballast water) and non-shipping (seafood, aquaculture, bait, and pet industries) pathways. A second research direction

exam ines behavioral and m o rphological res ponses by introduced predators and native prey to each other. He is particularly interested in determ ining whether trophic interactions generate sho r t or long-term arm s races as i nduced defenses in prey are countered by im proved foraging effectiveness in invading predators. His lab is currently testing for diet-induced changes in claw size and perform a nce in an invading crab predato r and induced changes in shell for m in native snail pr ey over a latitudinal

tem p erature gradien t

.

Representative Publications:
Sm ith, L.D., M.J. W onham , L.D. M c Cann, G.M. Ruiz, A.H. Hines, and J.T. Carlton. 1999. Invasion pressure to a ballast-flooded estuary and an assessm ent of inoculant survival. Biological Invasions 1:67-87.

Trussell, G.C. and L.D. Sm ith. 2000. Induced defenses in response to an invading crab predator: An explanation of historical and geographical phenotypic change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 97:2123-2127.

Sm ith, L.D., M.J. W onham , J.T.Carlton, and G. M. Ruiz. 2000. Fish and ships: relating dispersal frequency to success in biological invasions. Marine Biology 136: 1111-1121.

Judith Pederson
MIT Sea Grant jpederso@m it.edu

Dr. Judith P e derson is Manager of the Coasta l Resource Center at MIT Sea Grant and has worked to improve the communications betw een scientists, m a nagers, and commercial interests in m a rine issues. She organi zed th e First Nation a l Conference on Marine Bioinvasion s in 1999 an d edited the proceed ings. Dr. Pederso n has estab l ished a web site dedicated to MIT Sea Grant work with inva sive species and continues to seek funding opportunities to increase awareness and edu cational programs thr oughout the state. Judith Pederson is working with L. Davi d Sm ith, Shannon Weigle and Jam e s Carlton on the transport vector study for New Engla nd m a rine invasive species. F i nally, Dr. Pederson took the lead in im ple m enting a Rapid Assessm ent Survey of invaders on floating dock and piers in coastal Massachus etts and Rhode Island in the summer of
2000.

Representative Publications:

Pederson, Judith, 1996. Exotic Species W o rksh op: Issues Relating to Aquaculture and Biodiversity. MIT Sea Grant Colle ge Program Publications: 96-15.Pederson, Ju dith (ed). 19 99. Marine Bioinvasi on s: Proceed in gs of the First Nation a l Conference January 24-27, 1999. MIT Sea Grant College P r ogram

.

Jan Pechenik Tuf t s University Jan.pechenik@tufts.edu

Dr. Jan Pech enik stud ies the stresses m a rine organism s experience in trans port via ship ballast water. Food lim itation for planktonic feeding larvae, delayed m e tamorphosis, and other s t res s e s that could reduce the s u rviva l or co mpetitiv e ab ility of som e species af te r

m e ta m o rphosis are studied to determine if th ey could help explain why som e species are

more succes sful invaders than oth e rs . The growth rates and p o st-settlem ent survivo r s h ip of gastropods, polycheate annelids, bryozoans and barnacles are st udied in relation to food lim itation and delayed m e ta m o r phosis to de term ine the relative com p etitiveness of different species that undergo tran spo r t via ship b a lla st wate r.

Representative Publications: Pechenik. J. 2000. Larval Experience can infl uence invasion potential for benthos m a rine invertebrates. J. Pederson (ed.) Marine Bioinvasions: Proceedings of the first annual national conference. MIT Sea Grant, Cam b ridge, MA.

Pechenik, J. Metam o rphosis is not a new beginning. BioScience 48 (11): 901-910. 1998.



### Asian Shore Crab

Nancy O’Connor University of Massachusetts-Dartm outh noconnor@um a ssd.edu

Dr. Nancy O’ Connor studies th e ecology and history of the Hemigrapsis sanguineus in New England. Her work with the A s ian s hore crab ranges from the genetic to population level. Recently she has collaborated in usi ng genetic patterns to determ ine the likelihood
of m u ltiple invasions on the eas tern s hore. Anoth e r project ex am ined the population density and distribution along w ith f eeding habits to assess the potential im pact of Hemigrapsis on community structure in rocky inte rtidal communities. Currently her research is focused on the effect of Hemigrapsis on native crab species in New England.

Tara Cassanova Cedar Island Marine Research Laboratory biotara@aol.com

Tara Cassanova studies the ecological and population dynam i cs of the Asian shore crab, Hemigrapsis sanguineus . Abundance, distribution and f eeding habits are analyzed to determ ine the niche overlap and possible com p etition with native species.Representative Publications: Casanova, T. 2000. The ecology of the Japanese shore crab and its ni che relationship to the green crab along the coast of Connect icut, U S A. J. Pederson (ed.) Marine Bioinvasion s. Proceedin gs of the First Natio n a l Conference. MIT Sea Grant, Cam b ridge,
MA.

Paul Boudr eau Center for Marine Science and Technology: University of Massachusetts, Dartm outh pboudreau@hotm a il.com

Paul Boudreau has worked with Nancy O’Connor on the feedi ng preferences of Hemigrapsis sanguineus in southern Massachusetts. Th e prey selection of m o llusks was investigated to gain insig h t in to the c r abs’ poten tial to a lte r New England rocky intertidal ecosystem s through predation. His w o rk has f ound that the crab is om nivorous, feeding readily on mollusks and m i croalgea. However , H. sanguineus selectively rem oved s m all individuals f r om the experim e ntal mollusk populations. H. sanguineus therefore has the potential to alte r natu ral mollu sk populations by affecting leve ls of prey re cruitm ent into adult size classes. Paul Boudreau starte d work in the fall of 2001 on the role of anthropogen i c disturban ce on invasive sp ecies success in estuarine and coastal environm ents.

Representative Publications: Boudreau, P. and N. O’Connor. 2000. Prey preferences of the recen tly introduced Western Pacific Crab, Hemigrapsis sanguineus , feeding on mollusks and m acroalgae in southeastern Massachusetts. J. Pederson (ed.) Marine Bioi nvasions. Proceedings of the First Nation al Conferen ce. MIT Sea Grant, Cambridge, MA.



### Botryllid Ascidians

C. Sarah Cohen Departm e nt of Organismic a nd Evolutionary Biology, Harvard scohen@oeb.harvard.edu

Sarah Cohen works with fouling ascidian s invasions. Her work is focused on determ ining the correct taxonom y of ascidians to aid in answering questions concerning their poten tial as threateni ng invasive species using genetic m a rkers and m o lecular identification. Behavioral and life hist ory variation between populations could be
im portant to the distribution of these species as invaders. Her work deals with the identification and distribution of ascidian s in general, with som e studies on the identification of invading species.

Representative Publications: Cohen, C.S. 2000. Botryllid Ascidians: Few In v a ders or Many? J. Ped e rson (ed.)M a rine Bioinvasion s. Proceedings of the Firs t National Conference. MIT Sea Grant,
Ca m b ridge, MA.Cohen, S., Y. Saito, and I. W e iss m an. 1998. E volution of allorecogn ition in botryllid ascidians inf e rred from a m o lecular phylogeny. E volution 52(3): 746-756.



### Cordylophora

Nadine Folino-Rorem Biology Departm e nt, Wheaton College Nadine.c.folino-rorem @ weaton.edu

Dr. Nadine Folino-Rorem studies severa l aspects of the colonial hydroid Cordylophora

spp. populations in brackish and freshwater habi tats. The work done in her lab includes prelim inary taxonom ic classification and DNA an alysis along with interbreeding experim e nts to clarify the pot ential discrepancy between the f i ve docum ented species of Cordylophora . Mapping invasion patterns and a ffected areas in conjunction with laboratory experim e nts on the transfer of the organism s from fresh to brackish water and vice versa are used to help understand the ad aptability of this hydroid in the invasion process. Experim e nts on growth and repr oduction were conducted to determ ine how effective temperature and chlorine are in contro lling the sp read of Cordylophora

. Currently Nadine Folino-Rorem is exam ining the fouling potential of this organism for

power com p anies and irrigation system s, a nd the co-occu rren ce a nd interactions of Cordylophora with m o re f a m iliar f o uling pes t s s u ch as zeb ra m u ssels and bryozoa.

Representative Publications: Folino, N. 2000. The freshwater expansion and classification of the colonial Hydroid Cordylophora. J. Pederson (ed.). Marine Bioinvasions: Proceedi ngs of the First National Conference . MIT Sea Grant 00-2. pp. 139-144.



### Grateloupia

Martine Villalard-Boh n sack Roger W illiam s Univers ity mvillbohns@m ediaone.net

Martine Villalard-Bohnsack focu ses on two aspects of the Grateloupia doryphora invasion in Rhode Island waters. T h e firs t, in collaboration w ith Marilyn Harlin (University of Rhode Island) i nvolves studies on the geographi cal spread of the species, morphological variations in relation to envi ronm ental factors, r ecruitm ent strategies, developm ent and ecological im pacts of the i nvasion. The second investigation’s focus, conducted w ith Marcie Marston (Roger W illiams University ), explored the source of the Rhode Island Grateloupia and genetic variation within the species. The taxonom y of G. doryphora is also being exam ined in conjunction with Marc Verlaque (University of Marseille, F r ance).Representative Publications: Villalard -Bohnsack, M. and M. Harlin. 1997. The appearan ce of Grateloup ia doryphora on the northeast coast of North Am erica. Phycologia 36(4): 324-328.

Villalard -Bohnsack, M and M. Mars ton. 2000. The Molecu lar Genetics to investigate the geographic origin and vector of invasive red algae. J. Pederson (ed.). Marine Bioinvasion s: Proceed in gs of the First Natio n a l Conference. MIT Sea Grant, Cam b ridge,
MA.

Marcie Ma rston Roger W illiam s Univers ity mfm@alpha.rwu.edu

Marcie Ma r s ton is a m o lecula r biolo g ist a nd geneticist focused on the genetic diversity and origin of the Rhode Island invasive seaweed, Grateloupia . The specific objectives of her project are to an alyze and then co nti nue to m o nitor any changes in the genetic diversity of the G. doryphora population in the N a rragans ett Bay, to identify the geographical origin(s) of the parental stock of the Rhode Island population, and to

exam ine the genetic relationships of Grateloupia species from locations around the world. DNA have been isolated from over 50 individuals represen ting all 14 locations and this genetic inform a tion is being used to construct phylogenetic trees to exam ine the relationships am ong individuals and to try to identify the geographic origin of the Rhode Island population. The data of Marcie Marston and her coworker suggests that there is an “invasive” genotype/species of Grateloupia that has been expanding in range and it appears as though the Rhode Island species originated from one of the European populations.

Representative Publications: Marston, M.F. and M. Villalard-Bohnsack. Genetic variability a nd possible geographic origins of an invasive species, Grateloupia doryphora (Haly m eniaceae, Rhodophyta) in Rhode Islan d, USA. To be subm itted to the Jou r nal of Phycology (in p r ep)

Marston, M.F. and M. Villalard-Bohnsack. 2000. The use of molecular genetics to investigate the geographic origin of an inva sive red algae. J. Pederson (ed.). Marine Bioinvasion s. Proceedin gs from the First Nation al Conferen ce. MIT Sea Grant,
Ca m b ridge, MA.



### Green Cra b

William W a lton
W e llf leet, M A Shellf ish Program Billy5@altavista.net

Dr. W illiam W a lton stud ies th e ef f ects of Carcinus maenas on shellfish and investigates possible solutions to the problem s the green crab im poses upon the industry. Municipal

m a nagers consider the green crab a major predator lim iting shellfish production and/orenhancem ent ef f o rts and W illiam W a lton has b e e n attem p ting to scientif ic ally docum ent this through lab and field experim e nts. Hi s current work also includes a study of the effectivenes s of town efforts to trap g r een crabs, the exploration of new trapping

m e thods, and population m odels that will gui d e targeted trap ping program s to reduce their num be rs. A pilot study has also been started at Beal’s Island to explore the feasibility of harvesting soft-shell green crab s based on work in Ital y on a sibling species,
C. aestuarri.

Representative Publications: Walton, W

. C. 2001. Problem s, predators and perception: Managem e nt of quahog (hard clam ), Mercenaria mercenaria, stock enhancement programs in southern New England. Journal of Shellfish Research. 20(1):127-134.

Walton, WC 1997. Prelim inary evaluation of the im pact of Carcinus m a enas upon the native Tasmanian clam (Katelys ia scalarin a) fishery. Proceedings of the First International W o rkshop on the Demography, Impacts and Managem e nt of Introduced Populations of the European Crab. Center for Research on Introduced Marine Pests Technical Report. 11:44-47.



### Phragmites

Robert Buchsbaum Massachusetts Audubon Society rbuchsbaum@m assaudubon.org

Dr. Robert Buchsbaum studies restoration and other m a nagem e nt issues rela ted to salt

m a rshes. The replacement of native ve getation by the invasive common reed, Phragmites australis, is thought to reduce the wildlife va lue and ecological health of the area. Buchs b aum and hi s coworkers have ex am ined differences between the types and

num b ers of birds found in Phragm ites-dom inat ed habitats with those in cattail and Spartin a spp

. He also has been exam ining chang e s in th e veg e tation and anim al communitie s in salt m a rshes tha t ha ve been subjected to inc r eased tidal f l ushing as a

m a nage m e nt m easure to reduce the cover of Phragm ites. This work examines heights and spread rates, standard m easures of th e plant community, ground water salinities, f i sh, birds, and m a rsh surface invertebrates. Buchsb aum has also b een explo r in g the effects of salinity stress on the spread and growth of Phragm ites.

Representative Publications: Burdick, D.M., Buchsbaum

, R. and Holt, E. 2000. Tidal Manipulations and Phragmites invasion of Salt Ma rshe s. Subm itted to Plant and Environm ent. Presen te d at Sym posium on Plants and Organism s in Stress ed Wetland Environm ents, Quebec.

Buchsbaum

, R., J. Catena, E. Hutchins, D. Burdick, A. Ridlon and E. Holt. 2000. Indicators of Salt Marsh Rest oration. Proceeding s of Conf ere n ce on the u s e of biologicalindicators to signal wetland health. Massachusetts Bays Program

. Nove mber 2000, Boston, MA.

Buchsbaum

, R. and E. Holt. 2000. Bird Use of Phragmites in Coasta l Marshes of Northern Massachusetts. pp 232-240 in J. Pederson (ed.). Marine B i oinvasions, Proceedings of the First National Co nference. M I T Sea Gran t, Cam b ridge, MA.

Burdick, D.M., R. Buchsbaum

, E. Holt. 2001. Va riation in soil salinity associated with expansion of Phragmites australis in salt m a rsh e s. Environmental and Experimental Botany . 46:247-261.

### Appendi x E: Nonindi g enous Aquatic Sp ecies Documented in New England

M a r i n e O r g a n i s m s ( f r o m C a r l t o n , 1997)

Taxon C o m m o n N a m e C o m m e n t s

PROTISTA

Ha pl os p o ri di u m nel s o n i MSX (oyster disease) Massachuse t t s (1 9 6 7 ) . Tra n s p ort e d f r o m m i dAtlan tic co ast with sh ellfish sto c k s ?

Perkins u s marinus D e r m o o y ster d i sease Massachu s etts? (1990 ) A s abo v e

. Bo na mi a ost r e a Bonam i a oyster disease Maine (1991). As a b ove.
Aure ococc u s a n o p hae gef f

e re ns B r o w n t i d e So ut he rn Ne w En gl an d. C r y p t oge ni c.
Di a t om ace a ( d i a t o ms )

Co scino d i scu s wa ilesii C r y p t o geni c Dinoflag ella ta (dino f l a g e llates)

Alexa nd rium min u t um C r y p t o geni c

CHLO ROP H YTA (Gree n Alg a e)

C

odi um f r a g i l e spp. t o m e nt os oi des Dead m a n' s fi ngers 19 5 7 L o ng Isl a nd; n o w C a na d a t o No rt h
Caro lin a. Cladophora se ricea C r y p t o geni c

R H OD OP HYTA (R ed A l g a e)

An tith amn i on n i pp on icum 19 8 6 L o ng Isl a nd S o u n d (J. F o ert c h). Ja pane se.
Por phy ra yezo e nsi s No ri Un de r ope n se a m a riculture in M a ine

. Fu rcella ri a lumb rica lis No va Scot i a (E ur o p e).

Lomen t a r ia davello sa Co nn ecticu t to New Ham p sh ire (Eu r opea n /M editerra nea n ).

Lo meni an a orc aae nsl s C r y p t o geni c ( N o v a Scot i a )

.

Gym n og o ngr u s sp

. ( P o s s i b l y G

. l e pt o phyl l u s ) C r y p t oge ni c

Grat el ou pi a d o r

yp hor a 1 990 s i n Rhode I s land ( P acif i c O cean sp ecies)

. M a y sprea d n o r t h a n d s out h. Polysiphonia harveyi F i l a m e nt o u s

.

P H A E OP HYTA ( B ro wn A l g a e )

Fuc u s serr at us Fuc u s Eu rop ean.197 2Myso t ella myoso tis European m a rsh s n ail Also Ova t ella myo s o tis . First reco rd 1 8 4 1

, Massachusetts.

Litto rin a litto rea European pe ri winkle

Litto rin a sa xa t ilis Peri wi nkl e i n t r og ressi ons o f e u r o genes nee d t o be c h ecke d for; a species nati ve to Atlantic
A m er ica b u t no d oub t co mmo n l y tr an sp or ted
fr om Euro pe f o r

seve ral ce nt uri e s a s wel l

.

Tri t oni a pl ebei a Sea slug European; Mas s achusetts and New Ham p shire.

Ten e llia a d sp ersa Sea slug Cryptogenic.

Pl aci d a den d ri t i c a Saco gl ossa n sl ug Fi rst rec o r d e d i n New E ngl a n d wat e rs fo llowing t h e i n tro d u c tion o f th e green seaweed
C

odi um f r a g i l e t o me nt o s oi des

. ANIMALI A

B i val vi a
Ra ngi a c une at a At l a nt i c ra ngi a Hu ds on R i ve r, in trodu ced from mid

- Atlan tic or
fu rt he r s out h ( 1 9 8 8 )

. D r eissena po lym o rph a Zebra m u ssel Fres hwat e r a n d ol i g ohal i n e po pul at i o ns i n Hu ds on R i ve r and t o be e x pe ct ed el sew h er e i n New E ngl a n d

. Mytilo p s is leu c o pha ea t a Dar k fal s e m u ssel Int r o duce d fr o m m i d-At l a nt i c o r f

u rt her s out h.

Ostrea edu lis European oyst er Maine, Ne w Ha m p sh ir e, Rhod e I s land

, Co nn ecticu t (th e latter three states d u ring and sin ce th e 198 0s)

. C

r ass o st rea gi gas Pacific oyster Releases over t h e years of t h e Pacific oyster
h a v e at th is time no t resu lted in an y kno wn estab lish e d pop u l ation s

. Vener upi s p h i l i ppi na ru m Manilla cla m Occasional spe c i m ens are ta ken "in the wild", b u t no estab lish e d pop u l ations ar e yet k nown ; Also Ta pes j a p oni c a

. Teredo bartschi Shipworm Indo-Paci fic species estab lished in Lo ng Islan d
So un d.

Teredo na va lis Shi p w o rm Int r o duce d fr o m Europe i n 1 8 t h o r 17t h centuries. Teredo f u rcifera Shipworm Indo-Paci fic species form erly estab lish e d in
Lo ng Isl a nd S o un d
CR UST ACE A Amphip o d a (amphipods)

Co roph ium vo lu ta tor Eu rop ean. Bay of Fu nd y-Gu lf of Main e.
C

h el ur a t e re br ans Wo o d

- b ori n g a m phi pod Eur o pean ?

I s o po da
Limnori a sp

. / sp p. Gri bbl es St at us of n o n

- n a t i v e l i m nori i d s re qui res revi e w ; L. tripun cta t a is likely pre s ent

, at least sout h of Cap e Cod

. My si dace a (m ysi d s, o p os su m shrimp)
Prau nu s flexu osu s Eu rop e

. First fo und in 196 0 in Massachu s etts.Cirripedia (barnacles)
Ba lanu s a m ph itrite In d o -Paci fic. F o u n d in s u m m ers as fa r no rth as

so u t h e rn Cap e Co d, is m o re lik ely th e resu lt o f a lack of exploration. See Carlto n , 19 85

Bal a n u s s u bal bi d u s In trod u c ed from mid

- Atlan tic. No reco rd s i n N e w En g l an d sin ce 197 2, w h en sp ecim e n s were fo und in th e C h arles River, bu t th is

B r ach y ur a (cr a bs )

C

a rci n us m a en as European gree n c r ab Known from Atlan tic Am eric a sin ce abo u t 1 820

. H

e m i g r ap su s sa ngu in eu s Japa nese s h ore cra b Fi rst f

o un d i n New Jersey i n 19 8 8 , s p readi n g t o Lon g I s lan d Sou n d b y 1 993 . an d now foun d

n o r t h of Cap e Co d ( J o hn McD e r m o tt, p e rson al

com m uni cat i on)

.
I n s e c t a
An iso l a b i s ma ritime M a ri t i m e earwi g Eur o pe

ECTOPROCTA (Bryo z o a )

C h eilo st omata Bug u l a n e ritina Pu rp le bu gu la First fou n d i n 1 993 in Millst o n e , CT (J.
Foe r tch, pe rs. com m .).

Mem bra n i p or a me mbr a na cea K e lp br yo zo an Fr o m Eur o p e or Nor t h Pacif i c. 198 7.

Aet e a an g u i n a C r y p t o geni c

. Ctenos t o m a t a
Bu lb ella ab scon d ita M a rt ha' s Vi ne y a rd, M A (E ur ope ).

Tan g e n e lla muelleri W a quo it Bay, MA ( E ur op e)

Ta nge nel l a a p

p en di cul a t a M a rt ha' s Vi ne y a rd, M A

. C r y p t o geni c.
ENTOPR OCT A

Bare nt si a be ne deni Massachusetts (E urope).

CHO R DAT A

A s c i d i a c ea ( s ea s q u i r t s) Botryllus sc hlosseri Star tunicate Europe; prese n t since early 19th cent u ry at least.

Bo tryllo id es vio l a c eu s C o m pou nd sea sq ui rt Pu bl i s he d nam e s i n cl u d e A

. diegensis and A. l e achi i fo r th is sp ecies in New Eng l and waters. First rec o r d s ar e sum m er 19 7 2 whe n it was released i n Eel Pond, Woods Hole, MA.

.

D i

p l osoma listeria num C o m pou nd sea sq ui rt M a y be Di pl os om a l i s t e ri a n u m ( also D.

mac d on al di a u d t

. ) First records a r e m i d-1980s
in Massach u s et ts and Conn ecticu t . L Harris
fi rst f

o un d i t n o rt h of C a pe C o d at

t h e Isl e o f Sho a ls in 199 2.St yel a cl ava Stalk e d Sea Squ i r t

. A s ia. Fi r s t r e cor d s abou t 197 2 sou t h of Cap e Co d. Now k now n fr o m Main e to N e w Jersey.

S t

yela ca nopu s Sea sq u i rt also Styela p a r tita. An early in tro d u c tion from the Pacific.

St

yel a pl i c at a Sea s quirt Records north of Chesa p ea ke Bay need to be checke d

. Asci di el l a aspe rsa Eu rop ean sea sq u i rt. First seen b y R. Wh ittak e r abo u t 19 85 i n M a ssach uset t s ; ab un da nt by l a t e 19 8 0 s i n Co nn ecticu t

. Mol g ul a m a nh at t e nsi s Sea s qui rt C r y p t o geni c.
Cio n a in testinalis Sea S qui rt C r y p t o geni c.

Fish Hyps o b l e n n i u s i ont ha s Blen n y Fro m mid

- Atlan tic; iso l ated reco rd 19 85 (H ud so n R i ver )

. Gob i on ellu s hasta tu s Gob y Fro m mid

- Atlan tic; iso l ated reco rd 19 93 (H ud so n R i ver )

. PLANTAE

Salt m a rsh p l an t in trod u c tions List in

pre p arat i o n.

C A P E COD C ANA L IN TR OD UC TION S

A num ber of s out her n s p eci e s are bel i e ve d t o have m oved fr om t h e so ut h e rn si de o f C a p e C o d i n t o C a p e C o d a nd

Massachusetts Bay via the Ca pe C o d Canal sin ce 191 4. A pap e r is in pr ep ar atio n.

Source: Carlton, J.T. 1997. Draft Marine Biolog ical Invasions: An Annotated Check List. Unpublished data. W illiam s College-Mystic Seap ort, Mys tic, Connecticu t

. 4pp.Freshw ater Plants
Draft Nonindigenous, Aquatic Vascul ar Plants in Massachusetts

Com p iled by P a ul S o m e rs, P h

. D

., State Bot a nist, Natural He ritage & E nda ngered Species Program
M a ssach uset t s Di vi si o n of Fi s h eri e s & W i l d l i fe Febr u a r y 21 , 20 02

**H F**  **L O**  **A T**  **I N**  **G &**  **/ O**  **R S**  **U B**  **M E**  **R S**  **E D**  **L E**  **A V** 

**E S**  **) S**  **T R**  **I C**  **T L**  **Y A**  **Q U**  **A T**  **I C**  **S P**  **E C**  **I E**  **S (**  **W I**  **T**

**Scientific Name Common Name** 
Cabomba caraoliniana A. Gray Fanwort Callitriche stagnalis Scop. Stream or pond water-starwort Egeria densa Planchon Brazilian waterweed
Eichornia crassipes (Mart.) Solms 0 Water-hyacinth
Hydrilla verticillata (L.f.) Royle Hydrilla Myriophyllum heterophyllum Michx. Variable water-milfoil Myriophyllum spicatum L. Eurasian water-milfoil Najas guadalupensis (Sprengel) Magnus Guadalupe naiad Najas minor All. Lesser or brittle naiad Nymphaea odorata ssp. tuberosa (Paine) Wiersema & Hellquist Tuberous water-lily

Nymphoides peltata (Gmelin) Kuntze Yellow floating heart Potamogeton crispus L. Curly pondweed
Salvinia minima Baker Water-fern, water spangles
Spirodela punctata (Mey.) Thompson 1 Dotted duckweed
Trapa natans L. Water-chestnut

Utricularia inflata Walt. 2 Large floating bladderwort

**SELECTED WETLAND SPECIES (I.E., THOSE OFTEN FOUND AS EMERGENTS OR**

**R O**  **W I**  **N G**  **I N**  **S A**  **T U**  **R A**  **T E**  **D S**  **O I**  **L S**  **O F**  **M A** 

**R S**  **H E**  **S ,**  **S W**  **A**

**M P**  **S ,**  **S T**  **R E**  **A M**  **B A**  **N K**  **S )**  **G**

**Scientific Name Common Name**  Agrostis gigantea Roth Redtop, black bentgrass Alopecurus carolinianus Walter Carolina foxtail Alopecurus geniculatus L. Marsh- or water-foxtail

Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.)Sauer Water-hemp Amorpha fruticosa L

. F a l s e i n d i g o Arthraxon hispidus (Thunb.) Makino Arthraxon Bidens tripartita L. Leafy-bracted beggar-ticks Calamagrostis epigeios (L.) Roth Feathertop Cyperus amuricus Maxim. Golden flatsedge Cyperus flavescens L. Yellowish flatsedge Cyperus pseudovegatus Steudel Marsh or clay-flatsedge Diplachne fascicularis (Lam.) Beauv. Salt-meadow grass Diplachne uninervia (C. Presl) Parodi Mexican sprangletop Elytrigia pungens (Pers.) Tutin Seabeach or Saltmarsh wheatgrass Epilobium hirsutum L. Hairy willow-herb Glyceria maxima (Hartman) Holmb. Reed manna-grass, sweet reedgrassHesperis matronalis L. Dame’s rocket Iris pseudoacorus L. Yellow iris

Iva annua L. Sump-weed Juncus brachycarpus Engelm. Small-headed rush Lepidium latifolium L. Broad-leaved pepperweed Lycopus europaeus L. European water-horehound Lysimachia nummularia L. Moneywort, Creeping Jenny Lysimachia vulgaris L. Garden-loosestrife Lythrum hyssopifolia L. Annual or hyssop loosestrife Lythrum salicaria L. Purple loosestrife Lythrum virgatum L. Wand-loosestrife Microstegium vimineum (Trin.) A.

Camus Japanese stiltgrass

Mollugo verticillata L. Carpetweed Myosotis scorpioides L. True forget-me-not Myosoton aquaticum (L.) Moench Giant chickweed

Nelumbo lutea Willd. American lotus, Water-chinquapin

Phalaris arundinacea L. 3 Reed canary-grass

Phalaris canariensis L. Canary-grass Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex.

Steudel 4 Phragmites, common reed

Potentilla rivalis Nutt. Brook cinquefoil Rorippa amphibia (L.) Baker Water or amphibious watercress Rorippa microphylla (Boenn.)Hyl. Small-leaved water-cress Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum (L.)Hayek Water-cress

Rorippa palustris (L.) Besser ssp. palustris (two other ssp. are native) Marsh yellowcress

Rumex aquaticus L. var. fenestratus (Greene) Dorn Window-dock

Rumex saliciifolius J.A. Weinm. Willow-leaf dock

Solanum dulcamara L. Bittersweet nightshade Stachys palustris L. ssp. palustris Marsh hedge-nettle
Teucrium canadense var. occidentale (A. Gray) McClintock & Epling Hairy Germander

Veronica beccabunga L. var. beccabunga Brooklime

0 Not fully documented as naturalized in Massachusetts , but a few reports of it being present and persisting in natural settings on Cape Cod and Nantucket have been made

1 Not yet documented in MA by Sorrie and Somers (1999) or by MA NHESP, but cited in literature

2 Possibly native, but all records are recent, suggesting it has been introduced into the state

3 May be a native species (Sorrie and Somers 1999) or a mix of native and introduced genotypes

4 Considered a native species in part, but inland and some coastal populations are probably alien (Sorrie and Somers 1999