Invasive Species Specialist Group of the IUCN Species Survival Commission

ALIENSNumber 19 & 20 2004

Sponsored by:

Landcare ResearchManaaki Whenua

ISSN: 1173-5988

WORLDCONSERVATIONCONGRESSBANGKOK

ISSGANNIVERSARY

SPECIAL DOUBLE ISSUEONE EARTH ONE FUTURE

The proceedings of: The Indian Ocean Com-mission Workshop on Invasive Alien Speciesand Terrestrial Ecosystem Rehabilitation forWestern Indian Ocean Island States - SharingExperience, Identifying Priorities and DefiningJoint Action - Organised by the IUCN IndianOcean Plant Specialist Group with the help ofthe IUCN Invasive Species Specialist Groupand held in the Seychelles in October 03are available as a zip file from the ISSG websitewww.issg.org (follow the link The Proceed-ings of the Regional Workshop on InvasiveAlien Species and Terrestrial Ecosystem Re-habilitation for Western Indian Ocean IslandStates)

IAS IN WESTERN INDIAN OCEAN ISLANDS

CONTENTS

GENERAL DISCLAIMERAll material appearing in Aliens is the work of individual authors, whose names are listed at the foot of eacharticle. Contributions are not refereed, as this is a newsletter and not an academic journal. Ideas and commentsin Aliens are not intended in any way to represent the view of IUCN, SSC or the Invasive Species SpecialistGroup or the sponsors, unless specifically stated to the contrary.

IAS in Western Indian Ocean Islands2Invasive Alien Species at WCC 3Precaution in the context of IAS 4Palau Committee 5IAS and Globalisation 6Biological Invasions in Protected Areas7GISIN Workshop 8Development of native aquaculture(Mekong River Delta) 9Importance of Island Hopping 11International Trade and IAS 12IAS in Brazil 13Pacific Ant Prevention Plan 14German IAS economic impacts 15IAS Act in Japan 16Golden Apple Snail CD-ROM 17IAS and the IPPC 18Music CD for Conservation 19Cinderella species 20IAS Management and Conservation 21River Doce and Alien fish 23Pet Ant Trade 24Ballast Water agreement 26Mimosa Pigra in Zambia 26Trusts, Community and Conservation 28Publications (Bionet, ISSG, GISP) 29

ISSG Anniversary 31Pathways (Forests) 31ISSG Report 33Box: GISD 33Box: CII 34ISSG Members in South Africa 36Invasive Aquatic Species in Italy 36European Strategy on IAS 37The Baltic Sea and IAS 37IAS in the British Virgin Islands 38Connections with Home 39IAS in Germany 40CIESM and Bioinvasions in theMediterranean 41Slovakia and IAS 42IAS in Cyprus 43Aquatic Invasives in Ireland 44Report from Spain 46Aliens subscription details 47Generic information 48

WORLD CONSERVATION CONGRESS ISSG ANNIVERSARY

The World Conservation Congress is the general assembly of IUCN members, which takes place every three to fouryears. The Congress combines the business of the Union with technical conservation fora and provides an opportunityfor the sharing of information and experience among IUCN’s worldwide constituency of members, Commissionmembers, stakeholders and partner organizations. The Congress encompasses three principal elements: conductingthe business of the Union, assessing the work of IUCN Commissions and taking stock of conservation.

COMMISSION DAYS (16 and 17 November)ISSG will give two presentations during the SSC Commission days.

KNOWLEDGE MARKETPLACE, 18 November 2004 (12:00 - 14:00), Roundtable A2The European Strategy on Invasive Alien Species, adopted by all European countries in December 2003, provides aunique opportunity for a coordinated approach at regional scale to address the threats posed by invasions. Aim of theroundtable is to discuss options for future work. This is organised by the Council of Europe and ISSG (Piero Genovesi).

GLOBAL SYNTHESIS WORKSHOPInvasive alien species and biodiversity - Coping with aliens (Subtheme 1)Break Out 1 A: Impacts of invasive alien species on livelihoods, 19 November 2004, 09:00-11:30Through a series of presentations and discussions, this session will explore the impacts of invasive species on selectedwild and managed ecosystems, agriculture and development as well as tourism. At the end of the session, entries fora photographic competition on Invasive Alien Species will be displayed and judged.Break Out 1 B: Options for conservation of species and ecosystems affected, 19 November 2004, 14:00-16:30This session will focus on invasive alien species as a global issue with global and local solutions, and examineprevention, eradication, control and economic evaluation. It will also examine challenges, knowledge gaps and thenecessity for risk assessment when species are to be intentionally moved. ISSG will have a presentation (Mick Clout).

International Trade: Friend or foe of biodiversity?(19 November 2004). This sub theme will also include some discussion on IAS in its debate on trade and the environ-ment.

CONSERVATION PLATFORM – Global Invasive Species Programme (GISP) (19 November)The Platform will launch new partnerships, products and initiatives of the Global Invasive Species Programme andits partner organizations. The GISP Partnership is up and running again and supporting some innovative new workto tackle invasive species. ISSG (Mick Clout) will be one of the presenters

TRAINING WORKSHOP, 20 November 2004, (09:00 - 13:00), Training Room 4 .“Invasive alien species management for practitioners in gumboots, flip flops or suit and tie: there is always somethingyou can do!” Organised by ISSG (Maj De Poorter) in cooperation with GISP (the Global Invasive Species Programme).The training session will be an introduction to understanding various ways of preventing as well as fighting backagainst invasive alien species - (impacting biodiversity and livelihoods), focusing especially on what can be achievedlocally and with limited resources. Information on freely available sources of global best practice will be included inthe session. The overall theme is “There is always SOMETHING you can do”

DRAFT MOTIONSSeveral draft motions deal with Invasive Alien Species

ISSG BOOTH: in the Atrium Zone (A22) - please visit us! Information about ISSG’s activities, and demonstrations of theGlobal Invasive Species Database.

GISP BOOTH: in the Plaza zone (P56)

INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES AT THE WORLD CONSERVATION CONGRESS

PRECAUTION IN THE CONTEXT OFINVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES

The impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning,caused by invasive alien species (IAS), are often moresurprising or more complex than the impacts of agricul-tural weeds, for example.

Surprising: for instance, in New Zealand, wasps (includ-ing Vespula germanica and V. vulgaris) are alien inva-sive species and they consume large amounts of nativeinvertebrates. In addition, and surprisingly in view of therespective sizes of the animals involved, the wasps aredetrimental to the native forest parrot, the Kaka (Nestormeridionalis) – wasps increase to very high densities inthe southern beech forests and deplete the honeydew re-sources which the Kaka require as a source of energy tomaintain breeding condition (Beggs 2001).

Indirect impacts on native species can also be surprising.In a study from 1994 - 1997, it was observed that themajority of Lake St Lucia’s nesting Nile crocodiles se-lected open, sunny, sandy areas in which to deposit theireggs. Nests were only found in shaded sites in the Mpateriver breeding area and these nests were shaded prima-rily by the invasive alien plant Chromolaena odorata.Shaded site soil temperatures at 25 cm depth, were onaverage 5.0 - 6.0 °C cooler than sunny site soil tempera-tures at the same depth. Shaded site temperatures werewell below the pivotal temperature for St Lucia’s Nilecrocodiles and as a result a female-biased sex ratio wouldbe expected. (Leslie & Spotilla, 2000)

An established alien species may be “dormant” and showno signs of being invasive for years or decades, beforerapidly expanding in range and abundance and becom-ing invasive (Crooks and Soulé 1999, Mack et al. 2000).Triggers can include changes in ecological conditions –human disturbance, or even natural disturbances like hur-ricanes. An example is the spread of invasive trees in theFlorida Everglades, which was delayed until the area be-came more prone to anthropogenic disturbance (Crooksand Soulé 1999) and/or hurricanes. Another reason whyit may take time for invasiveness to show up is that it mayrequire cumulative interactions with other alien species.Avian malaria (Plasmodium relictum) was introduced toHawai’i in exotic birds kept by settlers, but it needed avector to spread. This was made possible following theintroduction of the southern house mosquito (Culexquiquefasciatus) in the water barrels of a sailing ship inthe 1820s. Hawaii’s unique native birds succumbedquickly because, unlike non-native birds, they have noresistance to avian malaria. The interaction of the aliendisease and the alien vector cumulated into the extinc-tion of at least 10 native bird species in Hawai’i - and manymore are threatened.

Not only can interactions with other alien species triggerinvasiveness in previously non-invasive species it can alsocreate a risk that an already invasive species might be-

come even more invasive. For example, in New Zealandthere is no evidence that exotic conifers can utilize indig-enous mycorrhizal fungi. It is possible that this is a factorthat restricts the spread of these conifers into NewZealand’s native forests. However, the exotic Amanitamuscaria is often found as a mycorrhizal associate of in-troduced conifers (Pinus spp., Pseudotsuga menziesii).Once this fungus is established in the native forests, whatis the risk that the conifers may follow? (Johnston P.R.2002 pers. comm. In email on Aliens-L listserver).

Such interactions can reach the level of ‘invasional melt-down’ -alien tramp ants (Anoplelis gracilipes) have formedextensive super colonies on Christmas Island (Australia)since the mid-90ies. Red crabs are highly vulnerable tothese crazy ants. The extirpation of native land crab popu-lation has had manifold consequences for the dynamicsand structure of the native forest, but is also facilitatingsecondary invasions. This includes facilitation by crazyants – through absence of red crabs- of invasion of nativerainforest by Giant African Land Snail (Achatina fulica),woody alien weeds and alien cockroaches (Green et al,2001))

Conclusion: Of course, many, if not most, alien specieswill not become invasive. But given that the impacts fromalien species can be direct, indirect, cumulative and/orcomplex, unexpected, surprising and counter-intuitive,and that they often only show after considerable lag times,any alien species must be considered “guilty” until proven“innocent”, where the risk of becoming invasive isconcerned. Alternatively, this has also been expressed byIUCN and GISP respectively as: In the context of alienspecies, unless there is a reasonable likelihood that anintroduction will be harmless, it should be treated as likelyto be harmful (IUCN 2000). Or: Every alien species needsto be managed as if it is potentially invasive, until con-vincing evidence indicates that it presents no such threat(McNeely et al 2001):

Given that the impacts from alien spe-cies can be direct, indirect, cumulativeand/or complex, unexpected, surprisingand counter-intuitive, and that they of-ten only show after considerable lagtimes, any alien species must be consid-ered “guilty” until proven “innocent”,where the risk of becoming invasive isconcerned.

Crooks J.A. and M. E. Soulé, 1999. Lag times in populationexplosions of invasive species: causes and implications. In O.T.Sandlund et al. (eds), Invasive Species and BiodiversityManagement, 103 –125, Kluwer Academic Publishers

Green PT, D J O’Dowd and P S Lake 2001. From resitance tomeltdown: secondary invasion of an island forest. in” TropicalEcosystems, structure, Diversity and Human welfare. Proceed-ings of the International Conference on Tropical ecosystems. K NGaneshaiah, R Uma Shaanker and K S Bawa (eds). Published byOxford-IBH, New delhi, 2001, pp 451-455

IUCN. 2000: IUCN Guidelines For The Prevention Of BiodiversityLoss Caused By Alien Invasive Species. Published by ISSG asspecial lift out in Aliens 11, 2000. Also: on web site: http://iucn.org/themes/ssc/pubs/policy/invasivesEng.htm

Leslie a.J. and J. R. Spotila “Alien plant threatens Nile crocodilebreeding in Lake St. Lucia, South Africa” . Presentation at theFifth International Workshop on Biological Control andManagement of Chromolaena Odorata, 23-25 October 2000,Durban, South Africa. Organized by the Plant ProtectionResearch Institute, Agricultural Research Council.

Mack, R.N., D. Simberloff, W.M. Lonsdale, H. Evans, M. Cloutand F.A. Bazzaz. 2000. Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology,global consequences and control. Ecological Applications 10:689-710.

McNeely J. A., H.A.Mooney, L.E. Neville, P.J. Schei, J.K. Waage(editors). 2001 Global Strategy on Invasive Alien SpeciesPublished by IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, on behalf of the Global

Invasive Species Programme (GISP). x + 50pp.

Maj De Poorter and Mick CloutInvasive Species Specialist Group(ISSG)

Based on presentations given by M De Poorter at “Invasive AlienSpecies and the International Plant Protection Convention,Braunschweig, Germany, September 2003” and Mick Clout at “In-vasive Plants in natural and Managed Systems – Linking Science andManagement in conjunction with the 7th International Conference onthe Ecology and Management of Alien Plant invasions (EMAPi7)),

Florida (USA), November 2003”.

National Invasive Species Committee formed (Nationwide, Palau)

The National Environmental Protection Council (NEPC) of Palau created a NationalInvasive Species Committee. The creation of the Committee is one outcome of anInvasive Species Prevention Course held in Palau in August 2003. The participantsin this course represented government and private agencies, companies andorganisations with an interest in invasive species issues in Palau.

One of the main recommendations from the participants of the course was that therebe a single governmental body to coordinate all invasive species in Palau. Thisrecommendation was brought to the NEPC, which endorsed it and forwarded it tothe President, who then directed the NEPC to take this responsibility. In response,the NEPC has formed the Invasive Species Committee. The Committee’s primaryresponsibility will be to develop a National Strategy to prevent and manage invasivespecies, and to coordinate invasive species efforts in Palau. (24)

Miles, Joel. Personal communication, February, 2004. TNC Listserve Digest #124.Found at: http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/listarch/arch124.html

Photo: Stowaways (Landcare Research)

INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES AND GLOBALISA TION: WHAT ARE THE LINKS?

Readers of this Newsletter are alreadyintimately familiar with the problemsof invasive alien species, and theireconomic and ecological impacts. Many of us may feel that we arefighting a losing battle, but perhapsthis is because we are fighting thesymptoms rather than the causes. Infact, I believe that we are experiencinga significant homogenisation of manyaspects of our lives, ranging fromculture to food to consumer products. The economic integration that isenabling us to become wealthier(notwithstanding the inequitabledistribution of this wealth in manycountries) is also driving thishomogenisation and is feeding theproblem of invasive species along theway. Global trade has increased fromUSD192 billion in 1960 to USD6trillion today. A visit to any harbourin the world will see large stacks ofcontainers, many of which are neverinspected either on departure or onarrival and, often enough, aresubsequently loaded onto trains ortrucks for further transport before theyare opened. Little wonder that thespread of everything from bacteria toinsects and mammals is increasing ata rapid rate. As just one example, the Asian gypsymoth (Lymantria dispar), which wasfirst reported in the United States in1991, entered as egg masses attachedto ships or cargo from EasternSiberia. The caterpillars of thisspecies are known to feed on morethan 600 species of trees and, asmoths, the females can disperse overlong distances. This species couldcause vastly more damage than theEuropean gypsy moth which alreadydefoliates some 1.5 million hectaresof forest per year in North America. Another aspect of globalisation thatsome of those working on invasivespecies give inadequate attention isthe transport of micro-organisms thatcause diseases in humans or animals. With some 700 million peoplecrossing international borders eachyear, the potential for them to carry

diseases between countries is greatand growing. The SARS virus is onedramatic example that led to billionsof dollars in damages due to loss oftourism revenues in Asia, Canada,and elsewhere. By consideringdisease organisms as IAS, we have anopportunity to build a broader alliancein the continuing battles againstinvasions, and many of the generalpublic will find disease organisms,such as West Nile virus, to be muchmore worrying than mere ecosystemdisruption. Many of us are working on addressingIAS problems at the tactical level,developing biological controls, earlywarning systems, and quick-responsecapabilities. All of this is to the good,but we also need to work at thestrategic level, and a good place tostart is the World TradeOrganisation. Governments certainlydo not look favourably on anythingthat disrupts free trade but under the1952 International Plant ProtectionConvention, reinforced by theConvention on Biological Diversity,governments have a responsibility toensure that species in internationaltrade do not become invasive and thatproducts in international trade do notinadvertently carry pathogens thatmay cause harm. While nationallegislation is essential, internationalcooperation might be even moreimportant given the internationaltrade aspects of the problem. Asystem of permits, managed as partof the international trade regimes,coordinated by the WTO, would likelyprovide more resources for addressingthe problem of invasive alien speciesand certainly move the issues higheron the agenda of those who arepursuing economic benefits throughfree trade. We need to ensure that freetraders are not free riders,externalising the economic andecological costs of invasive alienspecies on the wider society. Because the diverse ecosystems of ourplanet have become connectedthrough numerous trade routes, theproblems caused by invasive alienspecies are certain to continue. As

with maintaining and enhancinghealth, education, and security,perpetual investments will be requiredto manage the challenge presented bythese IAS. Generating theseinvestments will require that we workeven more effectively in convincingeconomic interests of the importanceof incorporating invasive speciesconcerns into all aspects of theirenterprise. Jeff McNeelyChief Scientist, IUCNEmail: jam@iucn.org

A REVIEW OF BIOLOGICAL INVASIONS IN PROTECTED AREAS

Protected areas (PAs) form the last remnants of less de-graded landscapes and ecosystems around the world. Theyare islands amongst an array of different land uses, andserve as benchmarks of healthier ecosystems. Althoughthe formal motivations behind proclaiming protected ar-eas may be varied, most would agree that the conserva-tion of biodiversity is a key issue common to all protectedareas.

In many areas the motivation for proclaiming PAs wasfor the protection of prized hunting species or stunningscenery and vistas. Due to this, the problems that earlymanagers faced were largely of poaching or injudicioususe of resources, which were anyway perceived as unlim-ited. In the early days of conservation, management wasnot based on scientific understanding, but rather on goodbiological observation and a common sense appraisal ofthe situation at hand.

Invasive alien species (IAS) were frequently cultivatedand intentionally dispersed in protected areas for a vari-ety of reasons. Only when deleterious impacts were be-ing observed was the problem of biological invasionsrecognised. Many sources point to the invasion of alienspecies being the second greatest threat to biological di-versity, second only to habitat fragmentation (IUCN,1997). Considering the formally protected areas such asnational parks, which are more commonly assured of le-gal protection from habitat fragmentation, invasions maybecome the greatest threat to many protected areas.

The last significant synthesis of the impacts of IAS inPAs was done by Macdonald, Loope, Usher & Hamannin the book ‘Biological Invasions: a Global Perspective’(Drake et al 1989). This chapter, which dealt with wildlifeconservation and the invasion of nature reserves byintroduced species, suggests that the introductions of spe-cies invasions is likely to increase, with increasing fre-quency (Macdonald et al. 1989). This certainly appearsto have been the case in South Africa’s Kruger NationalPark (KNP), where the alien plant list has increased fromsix taxa in 1937 to over 370 taxa (Foxcroft et al. 2003).

Interestingly, Macdonald et al (1989) show that the in-crease in number of visitors to a reserve leads to an in-crease in the number of introduced plants species. This isprobably due to the importation of propagules by thevisitors themselves, or by attaching to vehicles. Consid-ering the ever-shrinking sources of funds to support con-servation areas and lowering of government subsidies inmany countries, protected areas have to become more reli-ant on tourism for revenue. If the hypothesis that anincrease in tourism will lead to an increase in biologicalinvasions holds true, the short-term benefits of increasedrevenue will place an ever-increasing demand on resourcesin the long-term. This, as more funding is required to controlinvasions, and larger areas are being lost to unmanageableproblems, possibly resulting in lower tourism potential.

Macdonald et al (1989) also indicate that habitat modifica-tion leads to an increase in alien plant species, throughbuilding of roads, campgrounds and other facilities. Morerecently, studies in Chile indicate that roads representprimary pathways for invasions into PAs (Pauchard &Alaback, 2004). Further, road edges are also shown to actas reservoirs for propagules, providing continuouspressure and resulting in invasion further into the PAs. Inthe KNP, park staff have clearly been responsible for theimportation and cultivation of some of the most seriousand costly plant invasions (Foxcroft, 2000; Freitag-Ronaldson & Foxcroft, 2003). Considering all the potentialpathways of invasions into PAs, roads and ornamentaluse are surely one of the few pathways that can be managedthrough well-planned programmes and pro-activemeasures.

If any management of biological invasions is going to beefficient, early warning systems need to be established.However, many managers simply cannot identify many ofthe invading alien species (Macdonald, 1991), and rely ona few organisational experts to cover vast areas. In practicalsenses, this is simply not possible, and rangers, gameguards, tour guides and others staff (and suitably trainedvolunteers), that are operating in the field on a daily basisneed to be responsible for detecting and reportinginvasions.

Control operations are widely in place. This indicates thatPas are aware of the seriousness of the problem. However,follow-up and maintenance operations, which are criticalcomponents, are frequently cut short or neglected, allowingthe system to revert to its former invaded state. This isfrequently due to lack of long-term planning and budgeting,as well as a result of shrinking revenue for protected areasbeing channelled into income generating ventures.

As with many other aspects of PA management, fencesand other artificial boundaries are ecologically meaning-less. Protected areas, even those of millions of hectares,are islands and need to adopt an approach that is outwardlooking and considers the broader physical and social en-vironment.(References on next page)

Llewellyn FoxcroftKruger National parkEmail: LlewellynF@sanparks.org

References

Drake, J.A.; Di Castri, F.; Groves, R.; Kruger, F.; Mooney, H.;Rejmanek, M. & Williamson, M. (Eds). 1989. Biological inva-sions: a global perspective. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Foxcroft, L.C. 2000. A case study of the human dimensions ininvasion and control of alien plants in the personnel villages ofKruger National Park. In: J.A. McNeely (ed.) The great reshuf-fling: human dimensions of invasive alien species. IUCN, Gland,Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Vi & 242pp.

Foxcroft, L.C.; Henderson, L.H.; Nichols, G. & Martin, B.W.2003. A revised list of alien plants for the Kruger National Park.Koedoe

Freitag-Ronaldson, S. & Foxcroft, L.C. 2003. Anthropogenicinfluences at the ecosystem level. In: J. T. Du Toit, K.H.

Rogers & H.C. Biggs. The Kruger experience: Ecology and Man-agement of savanna heterogeneity. Island Press. Pp 519.

IUCN (The World conservation Union). 1997. Conserving vi-tality and diversity. In: C.D.A. Rubec & G.O. Lee (eds.) Pro-ceedings of the world conservation congress workshop on inva-sive alien species. Canadian wildlife service, Ottawa, Canada.

Macdonald, I.A.W. 1991. Conservation implications of theinvasion of southern Africa by alien organisms. PhD Thesis,University of Cape Town.

Macdonald, I.A.W.; Loope, L.L.; Usher, M.B. & Hamann, O.1989. Wildlife conservation and the invasion of nature reservesby introduced species: a global perspective. In: J.A. Drake,(eds), Biological invasions: a global perspective. John Wiley &Sons Ltd.

Pauchard, A. & Alaback, P.B. 2004. Influence of elevation, landuse, and landscape context on patterns of alien plant invasionsalong roadsides in protected areas of south-central Chile. Con-servation Biology 18(1): 238-248.

Technical W orkshop on the Implemen-tation of a Global Invasive Species

Information Network (GISIN)

The Global Invasive Species Information Network(GISIN) took another step towards becoming a reality dur-ing the recent Technical Workshop on the Implementa-tion of a Global Invasive Species Information Network(GISIN)).

The workshop, which was held in Baltimore on the 6-8April 2004, was hosted by Annie Simpson and a teamfrom the National Biological Information Infrastructure(NBII) and was attended by 76 experts from 26 countries.

GISIN is seen as a one-stop shop providing access to in-vasive species information from many diverse databases.These databases may contain species fact sheets, obser-vation data, maps, images, bibliographies, project detailsor experts’ names. The challenge is to standardise criti-cal data elements so that search results are meaningful.

To build on the work accomplished in past meetingsorganised under the Global Invasive Species Programme(GISP), attendees at the workshop divided into three work-ing groups to develop a GISIN funding and organisationalframework, to discuss the implementation of GISIN, andto develop capacity for others to participate in GISIN.

The Global Invasive Species Programme (GISP) and theInter-American Biodiversity Information Network(IABIN) will contribute to the organisational framework.IUCN- the World Conservation Union is the parent organi-zation of the Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG),which presented valuable guidance to participants on thetypes of information that should be collected.

The Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) pro-vides a working example of information system integra-tion and will provide assistance related to database infra-structure. NISbase is another working example of a distrib-uted information system. Representatives of a number ofdatabases present at the workshop have either joined it orare planning to do so.

Members of CAB International, BioNET International,and the Global Taxonomy Initiative contributed to thediscussion on taxonomy and unique identifiers for datasources. A capacity building database that will allow oth-ers to easily join the network is being developed by SilviaZiller and a group of database developers from SouthAmerica.

It is plain to see that momentum is building and the chal-lenges are being overcome one by one. A steering com-mittee is planning the next moves and invasive speciesinformation managers are being invited to join in the de-velopment of this important network.

Further informationGISIN: http://invasivespecies.nbii.gov/as/gisin.htmWorking model that links 6 participating databases:http://www.nisbase.org/nisbase/index.jsp

Michael BrowneDatabase Manager, ISSGEmail: m.browne@auckland.ac.nz

LOWER MEKONG BASIN FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE OFINDIGENOUS FISH SPECIES

The Lower Mekong Basin (LMB; including parts of Cam-bodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam) has an exception-ally diverse flora and fauna, including at least 1,200 finfishspecies (Coates et al. 2003). This represents over 4% of allfish species covered in FishBase (www.fishbase.org). Thespecies are distributed over 91 families, which is more thanany other river. LMB fisheries are highly productive, yield-ing some 2.5 million tonne annually, or about 2% of theworld capture fisheries. The capture fisheries involve anestimated 40 million, or 2/3 of the LMB population(Sverdrup-Jensen, 2002). LMB fish consumption is amongthe highest in the world at some 56 kg/person/year. Theproductivity of the system is driven by the annual flood,when the river inundates roughly 100,000 km2, or 16% ofthe LMB. There are signs that the capture fisheries aredeclining. Captures of large bodied species are decreasingand the average size of fish within a given species is get-ting smaller. There reasons for the decline is complex, butrelated to the construction of dams, conversion of wet-lands for agriculture and increasing fishing pressure(Sverdrup-Jensen, 2002).

Aquaculture in the LMB is developing rapidly, including alarge proportion of small-scale, low-input systems. Aquac-ulture is widely seen as a way to compensate for decliningcatches as well as a way to mitigate poverty in rural areas.However, the links between the capture fishery and aquac-ulture is strong, since many aquaculture inputs originate in the fishery. Fish seed is often obtained from the wild andimportant fish feed include low-value or “trash-fish”. Further, maintenance of brood stock and breeding programmes ofindigenous species relies on the availability of healthy wild stocks.

In the second half of the 20th century aquaculture development and extension in the LMB and elsewhere in the tropicsfocused on a few established species, such as Chinese and Indian major carps, tilapia and common carp. These specieswere already domesticated and their culture systems well studied. About 17% of the world aquaculture production isestimated to be contributed by alien species (Bartley and Casal 1998). This may sound high, but compared to foodproduction in general it is quite modest; Pimentel et. al (1999) estimated that alien species contributed more than 98% ofthe US food system. On the other hand, among factors causing loss of biodiversity, alien species are considered secondonly to habitat loss (http://www.biodiv.org/programmes/cross-cutting/alien/).

In the LMB there are yet few examples where alien fishspecies have become a serious problem. In the Mekongdelta in Viet Nam, Mozambique tilapia (Oreochromismossambicus) causes problems in shrimp farms. Anotherexample is the introduction of the African catfish (Clariasgariepinus) and the hybrid with the indigenous Clariasmacrocephalus, which appears to be affecting the abun-dance of the indigenous Clarias batrachus (Welcommeand Vidthayanon 2003). The most prominent impacts byan alien species on aquatic ecosystems are caused by theSouth American golden apple snail (Pomaceacanaliculata) which was introduced for aquaculture in the1980’s. It has now spread to many SE Asian countries andits voracious feeding behaviour affects, in particular, peri-urban wetlands (Carlsson 2004).

It is clear that alien fish species have contributed to in-

Photos Niklas S. Mattson. Top:Fish farmer, Takeoprovince,Cambodia. Bottom: Fish Farmer, ChampassakProvince, Lao PDR

Table 2. Status of AIMS priority species on-station. The number in the coloured cells is the average of a score from 0 to 3 given to the respective species by counterparts in each of the countries. The interpretation is as follows: 0 = no progress (blank); 0 – 1 = some progress (dark); >1 – 2 = average, ok (medium ); >2 – 3 = above average, good (light). Species/place Broodstock Breeding Nursing Grow-out TOTAL Anabas testudineus 3.0 3.0 2.5 1.5 2.5 Barbonymus gonionotus 2.8 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.8 Cirrhinus microlepis 1.5 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.6 Cirrhinus molitorella 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Hemibagrus wyckioides 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 2.3 Leptobarbus hoevenii 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.3 Osphronemus exodon 3.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 2.3 Pangasius bocourti 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.4 Pangasianodon hypophthalmus 2.5 3.0 2.5 2.5 2.6

Table 2. Status of AIMS priority species on-farm. For explanations, see Table 1. Species/place Broodstock Breeding Nursing Grow-out TOTAL Anabas testudineus 2.5 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.6 Barbonymus gonionotus 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.7 2.5 Cirrhinus microlepis 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.4 Cirrhinus molitorella 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.5 Hemibagrus wyckioides 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.3 Leptobarbus hoevenii 0.5 0.5 1.0 2.5 1.1 Osphronemus exodon 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 1.5

Pangasius bocourti 1.5 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.4 Pangasianodon hypophthalmus 1.5 1.5 2.0 3.0 2.0

creased aquaculture production, which has had positiveeconomic and social effects in the LMB. Globally, mostcultured plants and animals are alien to the areas wherethey are used, and it is probably unrealistic to expect thataquaculture will be an exception. However, indigenousspecies are less likely to cause environmental problems,and in the medium and long term things need to change.In the LMB indigenous fish species are generally pre-ferred by farmers and consumers, and if domesticatedstrains and culture techniques become available the pro-portion of indigenous species produced is likely to in-crease.

To address the lack of domesticated indigenous fish spe-cies for aquaculture in the LMB, the Fisheries Programmeof the MRC (Mekong River Commission, http://www.mrcmekong.org) is implementing a project on Aquac-ulture of Indigenous Mekong fish Species (AIMS), fundedby the Danish International Development Assistance(Danida). The purpose is to develop and promote indig-enous alternatives to alien species. To achieve this in asustainable way, fisheries agencies of Cambodia, Lao PDR,Thailand and Viet Nam (the four Mekong River Com-mission Countries) are supported to carry out the activi-ties. The activities include research into culture techniquesand training. An important function of Aquaculture ofIndigenous Mekong fish Species is also to support regionalnetworking among riparian aquaculture and fisheries sci-entists.

ReferencesBartley, D. M. & Casal, C. V. (1998). Impacts of introductions on the

conservation and sustainable use of aquatic biodiversity. FAO Aquac-ulture Newsletter no. 20 (December), pp. 15-19.

Carlsson, N. O. L. (2004). Invading Herbivory: Effects of the GoldenApple Snail (Pomacea canaliculata) in Asian wetlands. PhD the-sis, Department of Ecology, Lund University.

Coates, D., Ouch, P., Suntornratana, U., Tung, N. T., & Viravong, S.(2003). Biodiversity and Fisheries in the Mekong River Basin.Mekong Development Series No. 2, Mekong River Commission,Phnom Penh. (Also available at www.mrcmekong.org).

Pimentel, D., Lach, L., Zuniga, R., & Morrison, D. (1999). Environ-mental and economic costs associated with non-indigenous speciesin the United States. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Available athttp://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/Jan99/species_costs.html

Sverdrup-Jensen, S. (2002). Fisheries in the Lower Mekong Basin:Status and Perspectives. MRC Technical Paper No. 6, Mekong RiverCommission, Phnom Penh. (Also available at www.mrcmekong.org).

Welcomme, R. L. & Vidthayanon, C. (2003). The impacts of intro-ductions and stocking of exotic species in the Mekong basin andpolicies for their control. MRC Technical Paper No.9, Mekong RiverCommission, Phnom Penh. (Also available at www.mrcmekong.org).

Niklas S. MattsonAquaculture of Indigenous Mekong Fish Species,Mekong River Commission (www.mrcmekong.org), P.O. Box 7035 Vientiane,Lao PDR.E-mail: niklas@laopdr.com

THE IMPORTANCE OF ISLAND HOPPING- AN ACCOUNT OF THE USEFULNESS OF CAPACITY BUILDING FOR ISLAND PEOPLE IN

ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION

More than 30% of the species knownfrom the small Indian Ocean islandof Mauritius are threatened with ex-tinction, principally through the ef-fects of invasive alien species. Somevery effective species recovery, islandrestoration and mainland restorationefforts on a small scale have been car-ried out in Mauritius to date. How-ever, with the time lag between thefull impact of alien invasion and ex-tinction, it is clear that conservationwork in Mauritius needs to move to-wards larger scale mainland ecologi-cal restoration if her remaining ter-restrial biodiversity is to be securedin the long run. To undertake thiswork effectively involves several keychallenges: the technical challengesof scaling up efforts, the financialchallenges of making programmessustainable and last but not least thecapacity challenge. Till now, a greatdeal of the expertise underpinningMauritian conservation has comefrom abroad. Encouragingly a newgeneration of Mauritian conservation-ists is now emerging. It is vital thatthese Mauritians are trained in thelatest ecological management tech-niques to bring Mauritian conserva-tion to the next level.

Much of the early work in ecologicalrestoration in insular ecosystems suchas the use of island reserves for man-aging threatened species and the con-trol of introduced pests on the main-land was pioneered by the visionarynaturalist Richard Henry in NewZealand. In the late 1800’s, RichardHenry described the impact of pests(stoats, cats, ferrets - all introducedfrom Europe) on native species inNew Zealand and translocated thekakapo (a giant flightless parrot) fromthe mainland to an island off the coastof the South Island. This was the firstbig step in ecological restoration onislands. Those techniques were thentransferred and improved upon fromone generation to another in NewZealand. Mauritius has been benefit-ing from New Zealand expertise fromthe 1980’s; beginning with the work

of Don Merton and his team eradi-cating goats and rabbits off RoundIsland (an island rich in endemics),followed by Echo parakeet nest sav-ing and rat eradication on Flat island.

In 2002 Alan Saunders from the ISSGand John Mauremootoo then of theMauritian Wildlife Foundation hadthe insight to launch the firstMauritius-New Zealand exchange forMauritian capacity building inecological restoration. I was the firstMauritian ecologist to go to NewZealand for a 7 months training in‘Mainland Island’ management. Thisinvolved learning the latesttechniques in pest/weed control anderadication integrated with threatenedspecies management. ‘MainlandIsland’ is a term used by NewZealanders for a piece of forest ofimportant conservation value that isunder intensive pest and weed controlfor the management of threatenedflora and fauna.

Whilst there, I worked in 3 majormainland islands, and learnt ‘Main-land Island’ planning, implementa-tion, monitoring and adaptive man-agement. I worked with the expertsusing the latest and most efficienttime and cost effective techniques ofpest and weed control. I found thetechniques and tools used for weed/pest surveillance, control and moni-toring very useful and practical and Ialso had the chance to see how quar-antine (both mainland and island)worked in New Zealand. Monitoringthreatened species (both plant andanimal species) and using them as anindicator for effectiveness of pest andweed control stuck me as a particu-larly important not only for an un-derstanding of the current effective-ness of pest and weed control but alsoto see how quickly threatened specieswere benefiting from such control.Such monitoring also enables staff toperfect their skills known as ‘adap-tive management’ and also allowsthem to be accountable to both thepublic and the government.

Those techniques and tools, adaptedto local specificities can be replicatedfor ecological restoration of insularsystems elsewhere. Capacity buildingof conservationists from smaller is-land states by islands such as NewZealand with more human and finan-cial resources is the first step for themajor challenges to conserve and ap-preciate the uniqueness of islandbiodiversity by and for local people.

AcknowledgementsI wish to thank the CommonwealthScience Foundation, the Departmentof Conservation and the AucklandRegional Council for their financialsupport and the countless NewZealand conservationists who havemade this training possible, usefuland enjoyable.

Malika Virah SawmyRestoration EcologistEmail: malika.virahsawmy@geog.oxford.ac.uk

INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES

International trade is one of the mainvectors of invasive alien species(IAS), moving alongside with trad-ers, tourists and other travellers. Tocontrol the impact of IAS, it is moreefficient to prevent the entry of a spe-cies than to act after it has invaded.Developing policies to address thisproblem is a major challenge that hasrisen steadily on the internationalagenda. The 7th meeting of the Con-ference of the Parties to the Conven-tion of Biological Diversity (CBD)recently called for strengthened insti-tutional coordination at international,regional and national levels on IAS“as a trade-related issue” and invitedthe World Trade Organisation (WTO)to consider “the risks from invasivealien species”.

Several trade-related measures can betaken to prevent the introduction ofinvasive alien species: The “Guidingprinciples for the Prevention, Intro-duction and Mitigation of Impacts ofAlien Species” considered in the con-text of the CBD recommend bordercontrols to minimize unauthorized orunintentional introduction of alienspecies. Intentional introductionsshould be subject to authorizationbased on a prior risk assessment us-ing a precautionary approach. In ad-dition, States should identify commonpathways for unintentional introduc-tions and proceed against them.

The extent to which such measuresare compatible with the WTO Agree-ment on Sanitary and PhytosanitaryMeasures (SPS) is not yet certain. TheSPS Agreement regulates trade mea-sures taken to protect human, animalsor plant life or health against risksarising from, inter alia, the entry orspread of pests and diseases. It re-quires members to base their mea-sures on “sufficient scientific evi-dence” and on “international stan-dards […] where they exist”. Thus, aprecautionary approach to risk assess-ment does not necessarily conform tothe requirements of the SPS agree-ment. Some sources of standards likethe International Office of Epizoot-ics and the International Plant Pro-

tection Convention are explicitly ref-erenced. The Parties of the CBD didnot decide to establish internationalstandards on IAS that could berecognised under the SPS agree-ment1 .

Other international instruments con-taining measures relating to IAS andtrade include the Code of Conduct forthe Import and Release of Exotic Bio-logical Control Agents, the Interna-tional Council for the Exploration ofthe Sea Code of Practice on the Intro-ductions and Transfers of MarineOrganisms, the International Mari-time Organization Guidelines for theControl and Management of Ship’sBallast Water to Minimize the Trans-fer of Harmful Organisms and Patho-gens and the Action Plan of theAgreement on the Conservation ofAfrica Eurasian Waterbirds under theConvention on Migratory Species.

Though the linkages between IAS andinternational trade are manifest, thelegal and policy framework has notyet evolved sufficiently. Within theCBD, Parties will have the opportu-nity to move forward on the trade re-lated aspects of controlling IAS.Other international bodies and privateindustry should continue to tackle IASin their particular contexts. In particu-lar, the conservation communityshould strive for increased multilat-eral consensus on trade measures forIAS, ensure that the SPS Agreementallows sufficient policy space for pre-cautionary measures, help to developregionally based risk analysis andtrade measures, enhance national ca-pacity and interaction between therelevant bodies.

The interlinkages between trade andinvasive alien species are one impor-tant topic for the Global SynthesisWorkshop on “ International Trade:Friend or Foe of Biodiversity?” atthe IUCN World Conservation Con-gress in November 2004. Apart fromthat, several components of IUCNwork on the trade-related aspectsof IAS. A joint project of the Policy,Biodiversity and International Agree-

ments Unit, the Environmental LawCentre and the Precautionary Prin-ciple Project explores the links be-tween the Precautionary Principle inrelation to invasive alien species andthe SPS Agreement while a furtherstudy in cooperation with the GlobalInvasive Species Project and the Na-ture Conservancy on InternationalTrade and the Regulation of InvasiveSpecies aims to provide informationabout the relationship of trade-relatedinvasive species measures and tradeagreements, identify opportunities tomove forward on IAS prevention, andreduce any “chilling effect” posed bytrade agreements.

Sebastian Winkler and WiebkeHerdingPolicy, Biodiversity and Interna-tional Agreements UnitIUCN - The World ConservationUnionEmail:sebastian.winkler@iucn.orgwiebke.herding@iucn.org

1 As recommended by the SubsidiaryBody on Scientific, Technical andTechnological Advice (SBSTTA)

INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES IN BRAZIL

Brazil is the largest country in South America and itsborders confront other nine countries. It holds nearly 20%of the planet’s biodiversity, as well as the largest percent-age of freshwater species. Although invasive alien spe-cies are a growing reality in the continent, they are stillwidely unnoticed by most, and expanding over preciousnatural resources and species.

The first event on biological invasions in Brazil wasorganised by the Global Invasive Species Programme(GISP) along with the Brazilian Ministry of Environment,in 2001. Compromises made then by the government havedeveloped into a National Policy on Biodiversity, issuedin 2002, bringing up several recommendations for re-search, prevention and control of biological invasions. Acall for projects to produce a national survey on invasivealien species (IAS) was issued in 2003 by the Ministry ofEnvironment and is being carried out by five organiza-tions in Brazil: the Institute of Oceanography of the SaoPaulo University, in charge of marine species; the Fed-eral University of Viçosa, of freshwater species; the HorusInstitute and The Nature Conservancy, of terrestrial spe-cies; EMBRAPA (Federal Research Agency), of speciesthat affect agriculture, grazing and silviculture; and theOswaldo Cruz Foundation, of species that affect health.

The Horus Institute and The Nature Conservancy hadpreviously started producing data on IAS that affect natu-ral ecosystems since 2002 and have so far registered theoccurrence of 150 invasive and potentially invasive spe-cies in the country. Given the diversity in Brazil, the oc-currence of species is always linked to natural ecosys-tems, including a few Brazilian species that have beentranslocated within the country and become invasive.Examples are Cichla ocelaris (tucunaré), a fish of theAmazon basin introduced into the Parana River where itbecame an invasive species, and Mimosa caesalpiniifolia(sabiá), a small thorny tree native to the dry northeastand invasive in the wet Atlantic Forest.

Widespread animal species are Limnoperma fortunei(golden mussel), introduced through Argentina in ballastwater, Achatina fulica (giant african snail), Sus scrofa(European boar), Lepus europaeus (European hare),Oreochromis macrochir (tilapia), Cyprinus carpio (carp),Clarias gariepinus (African catfish), and Ranacatesbeiana (bull frog) throughout the Atlantic Forest,most of which were intentionally introduced.

Certain species which have a clear history of invasion inother parts of the world, and which have proved to be-come far more of a problem than a solution, are currentlybeing promoted in Brazil. The best example may beAzadirachta indica (neem), a species widely invasivethroughout West Africa, recognised by farmers as a threatto economic sustainability. Neem is currently “the spe-cies of the moment” in North Eastern Brazil, where the dry

climate of the Caatinga is a restriction to non-native spe-cies. Neem has been so successfully promoted that bynow nearly every rural property has a few trees plantedfor producing “natural herbicides” for crops and medici-nal substances. No consideration has been taken for po-tential invasions, and if it does become invasive, it willbe established in all North Eastern states, probably al-ready in all municipalities. Acacia mearnsii (black wattle)follows the same trend in South Brazil, and is only begin-ning to be observed as invasive in riparian areas withinSouthern grasslands and subtropical forests.

Common invasive plant species are: Eragrostis plana, Ulexeuropaeus, Pinus elliottii and Pinus taeda, especially inSouthern grasslands; African grasses in the genusBrachiaria all over the country, and covering large ex-tensions of central savannas; Hedychium coronarium(white ginger), Artocarpus heterophyllus (jackfruit), Aca-cia mangium, Elaeis guineensis (oil palm) in the Atlan-tic Forest; Hovenia dulcis (japanese cherry), Eriobotryajaponica (loquat), Melia azedarach (china berry),Ligustrum lucidum, L. japonicum (tree privet) andPittosporum undulatum (mock orange) in different foresttypes in the South; Prosopis juliflora (mesquite) andMangifera indica (mango) in riparian areas in the North-east. Species currently promoted for bio-diesel produc-tion are Ricinus communis (castor bean) and Elaeisguineensis (oil palm), possibly characterising the “eco-logical” production of fuel as an environmental problem.

A growing list of species can be found at the Horus Insti-tute website www.institutohorus.org.br. Fact sheets of thespecies are being produced for access through the website,intended to supply information in the Portuguese lan-guage, which is very scarce.

The advancement of knowledge and awareness on bio-logical invasions in Brazil and South America is of es-sential importance for the protection of a large part of theworld’s biodiversity. International collaboration and pres-sure are important elements in this equation. Regulationsfor the use of species are lacking, while the pressure ofprivate production initiatives using invasive alien spe-cies is a growing factor. There is still no consideration forenvironmental impacts in decisions for the introductionof new species, and not enough awareness at any level,from scientists in universities to government officials orprotected area managers.

Silvia R. Ziller, PresidenteThe Horus Institute for Environmental Conservationand DevelopmentEmail:sziller@institutohorus.org.br

PACIFIC ANT PREVENTION PLAN (PAPP)

Ants are notorious invaders, particularly those speciesknown as “tramp” ants. They easily disperse worldwidethrough commerce and other human-assisted avenues,often cause significant economic and environmental dam-age, and are often extremely difficult or impossible to eradi-cate or control. Due to the difficulty and expense of con-trolling or eradicating these invaders, the most cost-effec-tive approach to addressing the problems they cause is toprevent their establishment.

An excellent example of an ant species for which preven-tion measures are especially warranted is the red importedfire ant (RIFA) Solenopsis invicta. One of the world’s mostsignificant ant pests, RIFA has been extremely successfulat spreading around the tropical and sub-tropical worldvia commerce. Outside of its native range in South Americait has caused considerable damage, including millions ofdollars in damages to agriculture; injury and death topeople, domestic animals and wildlife; and millions of dol-lars in damage to electrical and communication systems,and other electrical equipment. The history of its invasive-ness shows that once established, RIFA is very difficultand costly to eradicate and extremely expensive to control.Consequently, the most efficient and effective option fordealing with this pest is to implement comprehensive pre-ventative measures.

There are a number of other invasive “tramp” ant species,which also cause significant damage and should thereforealso be subject to comprehensive preventative measures.These other ants spread using similar pathways to RIFAand require similar measures to prevent their spread andestablishment. The most serious threats are from:Solenopsis geminata (tropical fire ant), Anoplolepisgracilipes (yellow crazy ant), Pheidole megacephala (bigheaded ant), Monomorium destructor (Singapore ant),Tapinoma melanocephalum (ghost ant), Solenopsispapuana, Paratrechina longicornis (crazy ant),Wasmannia auropunctata (little fire ant), Linepithemahumile (Argentine ant), Monomorium pharaonis (Pharaohant) and Technomyrmex albipes (white footed ant).

Prevention of RIFA and other invasive ant species fromestablishing on Pacific islands is best addressed througha regional approach. This is primarily due to the ease withwhich these species spread. Should RIFA become estab-lished on one island in the Pacific, it would provide a sourcefor it spreading to other islands/countries. Such island in-vasions in the Pacific are likely to lead to considerableeconomic and biodiversity loss and hardship for commu-nities. Therefore a regional prevention plan is warranted.

Goal: The goal of the Pacific Ant Prevention Plan is toprevent RIFA and other invasive ant species with eco-nomic, environmental and social impacts, entering andestablishing in or spreading between, or within, coun-tries of the Pacific Region, thereby protecting economic,social and environmental interests in the area.

The Pacific Ant Prevention Plan (PAPP) lays out the rec-ommended procedures, organisation and measures requiredto achieve the goal. It includes objectives under two broadheadings of entry and establishment. In addition, a num-ber of actions have been identified that are likely to berequired in order to meet each objective.

Prevention of entry measures required include:• appropriate legislation, regulations or standards to

deal with invasive ants pre-border and at the border;• risk analysis that covers the region but which can be

adapted for implementation to each country or terri-tory;

• regional trade agreements which accommodate risksassociated with invasive ants; and

• operational measures which can be applied to eachterritory and will actually prevent ants gaining entry.

Prevention of establishment measures required include:• a range of surveillance measures appropriate to quickly

identify the presence of a new invasive ant in eachterritory;

• appropriate incursion response procedures and thecapability to enact them;

• a regional public awareness strategy to ensure the antspecies concerned have appropriate public profilesso the risks of their establishment are well understoodby sections of the community; and

• an active research programme to ensure the measuresused to prevent establishment have a sound scien-tific base and thus will have the greatest likelihood ofsuccess.

During March 2004, at the joint Regional Biosecurity, PlantProtection and Regional Animal Health meeting held inSuva, Fiji, the Pacific Invasive Ant Group (PIAG), presentedthe PAPP proposal. The proposal was the work of thePIAG made up of members from New Zealand’s Depart-ment of Conservation, Ministry of Agriculture and For-estry, National Pest Plant Reference Laboratory, Landcare

Photo: S.B Vinson (Texas A & M University)

Research Ltd, Victoria University, and AgriQuality, Hawaii’srepresentatives from The Nature Conservancy, UnitedStates Geological Survey, United States Department of Ag-riculture and from Australia the Fire Ant Control Centre.Other key players instrumental in the proposal are the SouthPacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP), and theSecretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC). The whole ini-tiative is coordinated by the Invasive Species SpecialistGroup (ISSG) of The World Conservation Union (IUCN).

The following recommendations were unanimouslyendorsed by the Pacific Island, Country and Territorydelegates at the conclusion of the meeting:

• The meeting recognised that red imported fireant (RIFA) and other invasive ants as some of the mostserious pests (pest threats) in the region. Unlike otherquarantine pests RIFA can cause direct impact onhuman, animal and plant life and can devastate islandecosystems (environment) and livelihoods.

• The meeting supports the efforts of the PacificInvasive Ant Group and recommends that SPC, SPREPand PICTs work together to prevent the entry of this pestinto the PICTs.

• The meeting also recommends an increasedawareness campaign, training on identification of redimported fire ant and other invasive species to enablesurveillance and monitoring in the PICTs.

• The meeting recommends that SPC-PlantProtection Service focus on the following new arthropodpest(s) threats: RIFA and other invasive ants and to draftpreparedness plans

For the PAPP to succeed long term, it is absolutely vitalthat the Pacific regional partners (Australia, New Zealand,all the Pacific Islands, Countries and Territories, USA andHawai’i) act collaboratively to support, fund and implementthe plan.

With the continuing support of SPC, ISSG, SPREP andmembers of the Pacific Invasive Ant Group, funding iscurrently being sought to employ a coordinator to facilitatethe implementation of the above recommen-dations andthe highest priority components of the plan.

To down load a copy of the Pacific Ant Prevention Planfollow the link provided:http://www.issg.org/PAPP.htm

Simon O’ConnorNational Coordinator, Invasive Ant ProgrammeMAF Biosecurity AuthorityNew ZealandEmail: oconnors@maf.govt.nz

Economic Imp act of the S pread of AlienSpecies in GermanyNext to the loss of habitats the increasing number of alienspecies influences and changes worldwide native flora andfauna. The spread of invasive alien species may also havean economic impact.

This study by the Department of Ecology and Evolutionof the J.W. Goethe-University Frankfurt on behalf of theFederal Environmental Agency, Germany provides an over-view of the annual economic costs arising in Germany fromalien species (neobiota), in which 20 representative spe-cies have been examined in detail. The study thus repre-sents a snapshot of the current real annual costs. In total,the enumerated costs for these species add up to an aver-age annual expenditure of • 167 million. The following top-ics have been dealt with individually:

• Losses to agriculture, forestry, and fishery• Increased maintenance costs for roadways• Damage to waterways and rivers• Alien species that are health hazards• Endangerment of native species

Because of the nature of available data, as well as the dif-ferent biology and ecology of the alien species, each hadto be treated individually, and the associated costs varygreatly from species to species. Moreover, not all of thespecies investigated cause economic losses. Accordingly,a nuanced approach to alien species is essential. Ongoing,multi-year studies incorporating cost/benefit analysis willbe necessary to resolve remaining issues.

The results have been published in the series “TEXTE”No. 80/03 (229 pp.) of the Federal Environmental Agency,Berlin, Germany.

Publications of the “TEXTE”-series will be distributedoutside Germany free of charge and can be ordered di-rectly from the Federal Environmental Agency(Umweltbundesamt, ZAD, P.O.B. 33 00 22, D 14191 Berlin,Germany) or per email: umweltbundesamt@stk.deThe publication can also be downloaded via Internet athttp://www.umweltbundesamt.de

PUBLICATIONS

ONGOING MOVEMENT TO ESTABLISH THE INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES ACTIN JAPAN

The new Invasive Alien Species Act was promulgated asof 2nd June, 2004. It is the first regulation in Japan thatcomprehensively deals with issues caused by invasivealien species (IAS). The Act will be enforced within oneyear from the promulgation.For the details, please refer to the following website (all theinformation is available in English):http://www.env.go.jp/en/topic/as.html

Japan is importing an enormous number of living organ-isms. For example, about 620 million live animals werebrought into Japan in 2003 alone. This mass importation iscausing habitation of many alien species. So far, 108 spe-cies of vertebrates, 246 species of insects and 1,553 spe-cies of vascular plants have been identified as alien spe-cies in Japan. Some of these species are invasive. Theinvasive alien species are mainly causing three differenttypes of damage.They are: 1) Damage to ecosystems e.g. Java mongoose(Herpestes javanicus) decreasing habitats of endangerednative animals such as Okinawa rails (Rallus Okinawa), 2)Damage to human safety e.g. snapping turtles (Chelydraserpentina) possibly biting and injuring humans, and 3)Damage to agriculture, forestry and fisheries, e.g. raccoon(Procyon lotor) eating some agricultural products.

Unfortunately existing legal framework was not enough tocomprehensively deal with these damages by IAS. ThePhytosanitary Act, for example, can only prevent damageto agricultural plants. This is the reason why a new regula-tion to control the whole aspects of damages by IAS hasbeen proposed. Needless to say, significance of the IASissue was also evoked by Article 8 (h) of the Conventionon Biological Diversity stating the problems of alien spe-cies.

The Invasive Alien Species Act was approved by the Japa-nese Diet and promulgated as of June 2, 2004. The purposeof this act is to control IAS properly and to prevent thethree damages mentioned above. The framework consistsof the following three main points.

The first point is on banning various actions regardingIAS. Raising, planting, storing, or carrying IAS will be pro-hibited unless competent ministers give permission for thedealings (i.e. the Minister of the Environment. For mattersrelated to the prevention of adverse effects on agriculture,forestry and fisheries, the Minister of Agriculture, For-estry and Fisheries shall be added). The permission will beissued only when the applicants can keep the IAS out ofthe Japanese ecosystem. The permission is also prerequi-site for importing or transferring IAS. Discarding IAS tothe wild in Japan is not allowed at any time. Additionally,microchips will have to be implanted to some IAS for iden-tification.

Imposing severe penalties is another characteristic of thefirst main point. An offender will be put in prison for up tothree years or fined up to three million yen (equivalent toUS$27,000). As for a corporation that violates the Act - upto 100 million yen (equivalent to US$908,000) will becharged. These penalties are much more stringent thanexisting regulations for protecting biodiversity. This ispartly because importance of protecting ecosystems isgradually better recognised in Japan.

The second point is mitigation of IAS in Japanese ecosys-tems. The competent ministers will announce official miti-gation strategies for respective IAS. Mitigation measuressuch as capturing, collecting or killing IAS will be takenbased on the strategies. The mitigation will be performedby the competent ministers with other active organisations,such as other national government agencies, local gov-ernment and private organisations. When setting up themitigation strategies, priority-setting is recognised as veryimportant for effective enforcement of the mitigation dueto limited funds and staff.

The third point is judgment of Uncategorised Alien Spe-cies (UAS) before their import. UAS are alien species hav-ing the possibility to be categorised as IAS through de-tailed investigation. In short, UAS are suspected of IAS.They are expected to be designated in groups of speciesbecause names of some UAS are unknown. According tothis Act, importers and exporters of UAS into Japan haveto request the detailed investigation of UAS to the compe-tent ministers. Then, for up to six months, import of UASwill be restricted in order to complete the investigation.After the investigation, UAS having risks to cause dam-ages will be designated as IAS immediately while UAShaving no risks will not be regulated by this Act as long asnew evidence does not show up indicating that the alienspecies have risks to cause damages.

In addition to the three main points, the act has two fea-tures. One is establishment of the basic policy. The Japa-nese Cabinet will decide it for the efficient implementation.The contents include the basic framework of the regula-tion, principles concerning the selection, handling, andmitigation of IAS, and so on.

The other is attachment of a certificate for import. IAS,UAS, and the similar alien species will be obliged to attacha certificate to verify its type as an importation procedure.This certificate will become a powerful tool for customsofficers to prevent illegal import of alien species.

As previously mentioned, the IAS Act was promulgatedvery recently. After making the basic policy and designat-ing IAS and UAS, the Japanese government will enforcethe Act within one year from the promulgation. Public con-

sultation procedure on the first draft of the basic policywas already conducted between July 8 and August 7. Wereceived around 10,000 comments of agreement and dis-agreement to the draft, whereas only a few comments aremade during public consultation procedures in general.Based on the comments, the draft is going to be revisedand approved by the Cabinet in this coming fall.

For the efficient implementation of this new act, some chal-lenges have to be overcome. For instance, we need to widethe act’s target range as much as possible. More specifi-cally, tens of IAS and thousands of UAS are expected tobe designated for the first step. Likewise, there are severalchallenges such as arranging enough staff members forthe smooth enforcement, preparing effective countermea-sures against unintentional introduction of alien species,and establishment of efficient mitigation techniques.

Thorough research, database creation, consensus build-ing, fund raising, education, international cooperation, etc.will be the keys to solve the above issues. Specifically,when considering the fact that all alien species are comingfrom abroad, international cooperation to exchange relat-ing knowledge, data, techniques, and so forth are inevi-table. The Japanese government hopes to diffuse this newregulation internationally and obtain worldwide understand-ing and cooperation.

Toshikazu Mito (MAES, LLB),Japan Ministry of the Environment,Nature conservation bureauEmail: TOSHIKAZU_MITO@env.go.jp

NEW: Golden Apple Snail (GAS): CD-ROM

The golden apple snail (GAS), Pomacea spp. CD-ROMprovides a quick and easy access to about three decadesof literature on ecology, damage, management options andutilization. GAS is classified as an alien invasive pest ofrice, taro and other plants that grow in aquatic environ-ments. It includes over 400 articles, and over 100 images.The information is sourced from experts around the world.This CD-ROM is designed as a reference tool or a resourcepackage for agricultural technicians, researchers, advisers,students and for those engaged in GAS research, exten-sion and training. The CD-ROM is easy to use, as all thesoftware needed is supplied on the disc. The informationis easily accessed through Adobe Acrobat Reader.Information on this CD-ROM is searchable by author, title,and year of publication, journal title, and keywords. Futureplans include developing web wizards, establishing mirrorsites for web page and translating CD contents into Span-ish, Chinese, Thai, Khmer, Vietnamese, Indonesian, andother languages. We envisage that the cooperationbetween the GAS collaborators and institutions nowcontributing will continue to improve and strengthen infuture as well.

Citation: Joshi, R. C., Baucas, N.S., Joshi, E. E. and Verzola,E. E. 2003. Scientific Information Database on Golden AppleSnail (Pomacea spp.). CD-ROM. Baguio: Department ofAgriculture-Regional Field Unit-Cordillera AdministrativeRegion (DA-RFU-CAR) in collaboration with Departmentof Agriculture-Philippine Rice Research Institute (DA-PhilRice), Agricultural Librarians Association of the Phil-ippines (ALAP) and The Department of Agriculture-Cor-dillera Highland Agricultural Resource ManagementProject (DA-CHARMP).

For ordersEach CD-ROM is priced at 500 Philippine Pesos (localpurchase) and 50 US Dollars (foreign purchase exclusiveof postage and handling). ISBN 971-92558-7-0Ms. Salome Ledesma,President, Agricultural Librarians Association of thePhilippines (ALAP)University of the Philippines at Los Baños,Main Library, College,Laguna 4031Philippines.

E-mails:omecledesma@yahoo.comejoshi@philrice.gov.ph

NOTES

REPORT ON THE WORKSHOP INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES AND THE INTERNA-TIONAL PLANT PROTECTION CONVENTION:

An expert consultation of phytosanitary servicesand environmental protection agencies

1. This paper provides a brief report on the workshopentitled “Invasive Alien Species and the InternationalPlant Protection Convention” and the resulting recom-mendations. The workshop was held in Braunschweig,Germany from 22-26 September 2003 with funding fromthe Federal Ministry for Consumer Protection, Food andAgriculture of Germany. The workshop was organizedby the IPPC Secretariat, in cooperation with the FederalBiological Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry(BBA), Plant Health Department, in Braunschweig.

2. Experts from phytosanitary services and environmen-tal protection agencies, as well as those dealing with regu-latory issues, attended the workshop. There were approxi-mately 110 participants, representing 60 countries, with57 from developing countries and 53 from developed coun-tries. Funding was provided to cover the travel costs of49 participants.

3. This workshop was set up to help phytosanitary ex-perts, environmentalists, and regulators exchange ideasand learn how the IPPC and related tools may help in themanagement of invasive alien species (IAS). Theprogramme addressed issues that confront bothphytosanitary services and environmental protection agen-cies with regard to IAS. Presentations and discussionssought to explain the role of the IPPC, International Stan-dards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs) and systemsdeveloped through the IPPC framework, such as RegionalPlant Protection Organizations (RPPOs), and to identifyhow these systems can contribute to the management andmitigation of risks posed by IAS relevant for plants. Theworkshop resulted in recommendations being made byparticipants. A summary of these recommendations fol-lows.

4. Recommendations for participants:• Disseminate information gained from this workshop

to stakeholders (various ministries, agencies, col-leagues, students) within individual organizations,between departments and regionally and share yournew knowledge of how to use the IPPC framework inmanaging IAS.

• Apply knowledge gained at this workshop and pro-mote the use of ISPMs for IAS management.

• Network with other participants from this workshopto share expertise and exchange ideas.

• Start and participate in a pest risk analysis workinggroup.

• Ensure your country’s NPPO contact information isup to date on the IPPC’s web site (www.ippc.int).

• Meet your NPPO contact point or environmental pro-tection agency counterpart and discuss an approachto managing IAS issues jointly.

5. Recommendations for NPPOs:• Broaden the scope of plant protection laws and regu-

lations where needed to include IAS and biodiversityconcerns.

• Establish pest risk analysis working groups.• Develop pest risk analysis capabilities incorporating

biodiversity concerns.• Promote the use of IPPC standards for quarantine

purposes including the management of IAS.

6. Recommendations at the national level for work betweenNPPOs and environmental protection agencies:• Develop strong linkages between environmental, plant

protection and agricultural ministries and related or-ganizations in order to articulate common goals andwork together to reach those goals.

• Inventory existing legislation and identify gaps withreference to IAS issues.

• Review, define and clarify institutional framework andlegal mandates of different national agencies in orderto identify gaps and reduce duplication.

• Create synergy through better coordination and co-operation of NPPOs and environmental protectionagencies.

• Improve communication between the CBD focal pointand the IPPC contact point.

• Evaluate capacity to deal with IAS and make the mostefficient use of capacities for management and sur-veillance of IAS.

• Develop a national plan or strategy to deal with IAS.• Establish or adapt existing pest alert systems for in-

clusion of IAS affecting plants.• Develop and initiate research programmes on IAS and

areas of biodiversity.• Encourage public and political awareness and educa-

tion on IAS issues.

7. Recommendations for RPPOs:• Facilitate a regional approach to exchange informa-

tion on the identification of IAS that are of regionalconcern, coordinate pest risk analysis on a regionalscale and share expertise.

• Hold workshops to inform members on application ofthe IPPC and CBD for the management of IAS.

8. Recommendations for parties to the CBD:• Recognize the use of ISPMs for protecting plant

biodiversity as part of in situ biological conservationefforts.

• Urge parties that are not contracting parties to theIPPC to become contracting parties and to accept thenew revised text as soon as possible.

9. Recommendations for contracting parties to the IPPC:• Support the creation of a simple tool kit on the imple-

mentation ISPMs.• Support additional training workshops for develop-

ing countries, specifically on pest risk analysis andinspection.

• Develop more detailed guidelines on the criteria forinvasiveness within the framework of ISPM No. 11Rev. 1 (Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests in-cluding analysis of environmental risks).

• Encourage the use of simple language in ISPMs.

10. Recommendations for both the IPPC and CBD Secre-tariats:• Clarify overlapping issues and gaps between areas of

work.• Harmonize terminology, especially the terms “invasive

alien species” and “pest”.• Facilitate better cooperation between IPPC contact

points and CBD focal points.• Consider the possibility of developing a joint work

plan.• List reliable sources of information on pests, pest alerts,

pest risk analysis and phytosanitary regulations.• Create model(s) for country use to develop legislation

(e.g. elaboration of the Phytosanitary Capacity Evalu-ation Tool).

• Organize workshops or seminars where environmen-tal, plant protection and agricultural agencies meetregularly to review application and lessons on IASissues and hold an additional joint workshop on IASto help coordinate NPPOs and environmental pro-tection agencies. Some of these workshops should beheld in languages other than English.

• Encourage regional cooperation through RPPOs andregional information networks.

• Consider developing a programme to ensure exchangeof information at the global level both for quarantineand IAS purposes.

• Develop guidelines on invasiveness.• Organize training and capacity building for develop-

ing countries, especially in pest risk analysis and in-spection.

• Encourage additional technical assistance for devel-oping countries to improve the management of IAS.

11. As a result of this workshop, the International PlantHealth Risk Assessment Network has been formed to de-velop methods to harmonize the implementation ofphytosanitary pest risk analysis. This network is tenta-tively planning to hold a workshop on pest risk analysisin the fall of 2005 in Canada.

12. Presentations and exercises from the workshop arecurrently available on the IPP (www.ippc.int). A hand-book on the management of IAS through the use of theIPPC framework is currently being edited and will bepublished in 2004 if adequate resources are available.

Report written by Brent Larson of the IPPC Secretariat.The paper was prepared for the Sixth Session of the In-terim Commission on Phytosanitary Measures.

The paper is also available, along with presentations andworkshop exercises, at the following:http://www.ippc.int/id/26901

CLASSICAL MUSIC CD FOR CONSERVATION

“Wild Music” is a CD of classical music, featuring the NewZealand Symphony Orchestra, conducted by HamishMcKeich, to raise public awareness of conservation. ‘WildMusic’ features music by New Zealand composers Chris-topher Marshall and Douglas Lilburn, as well asTchaikovsky, Dvorák, Elgar, Saint-Saëns, de Falla, andMacCunn.

The project was conceived by New Zealand Departmentof Conservation ecologist Dr Eric Dorfman and ConcertFM, Production Manager Kate Mead. Concert FM is anetwork of Radio New Zealand. Each work on “Wild Mu-sic” is chosen to illustrate a different conservation issue.For instance, the introduction of pest fish, an escalatingproblem in New Zealand waterways, is highlighted by“Aquarium,” a miniature for two pianos and orchestra fromSaint Saëns’ Carnival of the Animals.

It is available for sale in CD stores. People wishing to sourceCDs can do so directly through the opuscds.com website:www.opuscds.com/cd/35781.

Aliens editor and Japanese knotweed on field trip from the“Invasive Alien Species and the International Plant Protec-tion Convention” workshop. Photo: Jens Unger

NOTES

Cinderella species and what happens after midnight?

‘Cinderella species’ is a term that has been used for overa decade to describe a number of promising economicplants, including many tree species. These are supposedto be like the girl in the children’s fairy tale of the samename, who appeared ordinary, but with a magic spell fromthe fairy godmother, was transformed into something ofgreat beauty to behold. However, maybe those of us whocontinue to use the term would be wise to read to the endof the story….

The fairy godmother told Cinderella that the spell wouldlast only until the clock struck twelve, when all the magicwould be undone. For a large number of exotic tree spe-cies introduced around the world, midnight has certainlypassed, and where once were timber, fuel and fodder plan-tations to be proud of, there are now widespread weedyinvasions. Whereas Cinderella was forewarned by the fairygodmother of what would happen at midnight, those nowhaving to live with ‘Cinderella species’ were not givenany indication of the potential dangers that have now cometo pass. Should not those individuals and organisationsfrom the research and development community and pri-vate sector who promoted these species in the first placenow accept some responsibility, and make immediate andstrenuous efforts to resolve the problems caused?

Foresters have been very successful in the selection, in-troduction, promotion and plantation of many exotic, fast-growing tree species for the benefit of rural people. How-ever, some of these ‘miracle trees’ have proved to be sowell-adapted to local conditions, that they have escapedfrom cultivation and spread widely as aggressive weeds,threatening, rather than improving livelihoods. The spe-cies are too numerous to mention, but one can find spe-cies of Acacia, Ailanthus, Albizzia, Alnus, Casuarina,Eucalyptus, Leucaena, Pinus, Prosopis and so on in mostlists of invasive species. They were introduced for theirability to provide valuable resources to local people aswell as variety of other services. Many remain the mainplantation species in some countries but are the subject oferadication and control programmes in others, with allpossible combinations in between. Why this difference?

Where trees have been introduced, indigenous knowledgeon their utilisation has rarely followed particularly withmultipurpose species, and combined with inadequatemanagement, many have often become unwelcome guests.So what are we to do with these? Many were identified asspecies meriting concerted efforts for research and devel-opment decades ago, whereas now they earn much moreattention as noxious weeds in most countries where theyhave been introduced. After decades of work, it appearsthat the research and development community cannotdecide what to advise, with perceptions of these speciesranging from the most useful and productive trees toler-ant of the poorest sites, to the common opinion today that

they are weedy invaders worthy only of wholesale eradi-cation. What is a weed to one farmer may be a source oflivelihood to another, but the extent of this dichotomy ofopinion regarding such introduced species is sending avery confused message to extension workers, foresters andfarmers alike.

Plant them, or pull them up? A little bit of both maybe,but more importantly ‘improve their management andutilisation’ is suggested as the way forward for many ofthese trees, not only to control invasions, but also to im-prove local economies. We are beginning to see the emer-gence of a consensus of opinion on general recommenda-tions for the future development of invasive tree speciesinvolving improved and integrated control, management,utilisation and commercialisation.

However, any developments in the management andutilisation of weedy invasions are severely hampered bythe lack of information on present status, including geo-graphic spread, density, species present, uses, manage-ment, and livelihood and environmental impacts. Giventhe impact of these trees on land use and livelihoods, be itpositive or negative, data collection and stakeholder con-sultation is urgently required, leading to comprehensivenational and regional strategies agreed by all concerned.

Let us not forget that the story of Cinderella did have ahappy ending, as can the story of invasive species. Thishad nothing to do with magic, but came from commit-ment and hard work – the prince tried the lost slipper onthe feet of all the girls in the kingdom, before he eventu-ally found the princess of his dreams, and in the mostunlikely of places. Likewise, overcoming the problem ofinvasive species will not be achieved by waving a magicwand, but only through a deep resolve and the involve-ment of local people, in looking at available and poten-tial solutions for the specific problems in various coun-tries – until we too find the perfect fit.

Nick Pasiecznik,CAB International,Wallingford,OX10 8DE,UK.Email: n.pasiecznik@cabi.org

Previously published in:CABI. 2004. Crop Protection Compendium. CABInternational, Wallingford, UK.ISBN 0 85199 649 3. ISSN 1365-9065.www.cabicompendium.org/cpc.

THREAT ABATEMENT PLANS – COMBINING INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIESMANAGEMENT AND BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION (AUSTRALIA)

The significant impact of invasivealien species (IAS) to biodiversity hasbeen widely acknowledged (see IUCN2000), yet little has been done to linkIAS management with biodiversityconservation, especially from an on-ground perspective (Mahon 2000;Downey 2003a). Reasons for thisfailure may be attributed to: (i) IASmanagement has not been alignedwith available information on alienspecies impacts to biodiversity(Mahon 2000); (ii) information on thespecies directly impacted by each IASis inadequate (Downey 2004); (iii) thelegislative requirements for alienspecies management – i.e. somespecies are listed under several Acts,while others are not listed under anyActs (see Downey 2003a); and (iv) theseparate historical managementapproaches of these two disciplines(Saunders et al. 1995; Downey2003a).

In Australia, legislation has beenestablished to address threats tobiodiversity, as part of theCommonwealth and New SouthWales (NSW) Threatened SpeciesActs i.e. through the listing of keythreatening processes. Under NSWThreatened Species Conservation Act1995 (TSC Act), any IAS can be listedas a key threathening process,provided it meets defined criteria (seeNPWS 2004; Downey 2003b;Downey & Leys 2004 for furtherdiscussion). To date, nine alienspecies have been listed, with severalothers being considered (NPWS2004). Once listed as a keythreathening process, the preparationof a threat abatement plan (TAP) isrequired under the Act. A threatabatement plan must outline astrategy to abate, ameliorate oreliminate the threat posed by the keythreathening process to threatenedbiodiversity, independent of landtenure.

This paper presents an overview ofthreat abatement plan s for alienspecies, using four case studies - Redfoxes (Vulpes vulpes), feral cats (Felis

catus), bitou bush (Chrysanthe-moides monilifera) and gambusia(Gambusia holbrooki) under the TSCAct.

Threat Abatement Plans (TAPs)

To date, all the IAS threat abatementplans, either finalised or being drafted,are separated into two groups basedon the level of available informationon the biodiversity at risk and the pres-ence of effective control options.threat abatement plans for whichthere are either no effective controlsand/or information on the impacts arelimited, aim to address such deficien-cies. The other group of threat abate-ment plans establish an on-groundstrategy which merges IAS manage-ment and biodiversity conservation.A discussion on each of the four IASthreat abatement plans, either ap-proved or in draft form, is presentedbelow.

Gambusia threat abatement plan

Predation by the plague minnow(Gambusia holbrooki) contributes tothe decline of native frogs, fish andaquatic macro-invertebrates. The con-trol options available and informationon the complete range of species atrisk is limited. The actions of the ap-proved Gambusia TAP are targetedtoward: (i) minimising human disper-sal of Gambusia through enhancedregulation, public education andawareness programmes; (ii) reducingthe impact at priority sites for keythreatened frog species; (iii) linking themanagement of Gambusia to broadscale water reform and river health pro-grammes; and (iv) promoting researchboth into more effective control op-tions (including genetic control) andthe impacts on native frog species(NPWS 2003).

Feral cat threat abatement plan

While many species are thought to bethreatened by feral cats, little objec-tive data is available to ascertain whichspecies are at risk, in part because fe-

ral cats are difficult to study as theyare wary of traps, shy and elusive. Thedraft Feral Cat TAP (DEC in prep.) aimsto overcome this lack of knowledgeby modelling the species at risk frompredation, using a similar model to theFox TAP (see below). Also, the con-trol options for feral cats are limited,with no effective broad-scale controloption currently available. The pro-posed actions in the draft Feral CatTAP are associated with: (i) the devel-opment of best-practice guidelines fortrapping; (ii) research into a cat spe-cific toxin and baiting system which ishumane; (iii) identification of priorityspecies most at risk of cat predation;(iv) public education and awareness,particularly relating to impacts tobiodiversity; and (v) gaining commu-nity support for the implementation offeral cat management once effectivecontrol options become available.

Red fox threat abatement plan

The Fox TAP was the first TAP to becompleted (see NPWS 2001). Theplan establishes priorities for foxcontrol, in particular it identifieswhich threatened species are atgreatest risk from fox predation andat which sites fox control for thesespecies is most critical. Thus a totalof 81 priority sites for fox control havebeen identified, providing recoveryactions for 34 threatened species (11mammals, 15 birds and 8 reptiles).Undertaking collaborative fox controlprogrammes across all land tenuresat these sites is the central action ofthe plan. The plan also establishesbest practice guidelines for foxcontrol, which seek to maximise theeffectiveness of control programmeswhile minimising the non-targetimpacts. In addition, the plan hasresearch actions to refine theseguidelines. Finally, the Fox TAPestablishes monitoring programmesto measure the response of prioritythreatened species to fox control.These monitoring programmesprovide direct and objectiveperformance measures for the plan.The Fox TAP is currently the largest

project for the conservation of threat-ened species in New South Wales. Anindependent review of alien animalmanagement in NSW concluded thatthe Fox TAP was the best approachfor dealing with alien predators (Eng-lish & Chapple 2002).

Bitou bush threat abatement plan

Bitou bush is the single greatest threatto coastal plant communities in NSW.A draft Bitou TAP has recently beenreleased for public exhibition (DEC2004). While, this plan was modelledon the Fox TAP, many componentshad to be reworked. Approachesrelevant for foxes were notappropriate for bitou bush. Inaddition, there was not the supportingbody of evidence available on bitoubush impacts to biodiversity that therewas for foxes. A model was developedin consultation with botanists andland managers – an approach that ledto a continual increase in theknowledge of the species at risk, fromthree to 63 plants during thedevelopment of the plan (see Downey2004). The draft TAP identifies 11plants, two endangered plantpopulations and four endangeredecological communities that are atgreatest risk from invasion at 60priority sites. The draft Bitou TAPestablishes five broad objectives,which aim to: (i) develop a strategicframework for delivering control ofbitou bush to areas of highconservation value (in terms ofthreatened biodiversity); (ii) developand promote best practicemanagement; (iii) monitor theeffectiveness of control programmesin terms of the recovery of threatenedbiodiversity; (iv) foster communityeducation, involvement andawareness; and (v) identify and fillknowledge gaps where possible.

Discussion

The threat abatement planningprocess has lead to a framework thatenables priorities to be established toreduce the adverse impacts of IAS onbiodiversity (English & Chapple2002). In this way, resources can bebetter allocated for both effectivecontrol of IAS and biodiversityconservation. The Fox TAP, in its

fourth year of implementation, is agood example of how this is beingachieved in the field. threatabatement plans address concernsraised in the United States, wherecriticisms of their threatened specieslegislation suggested that multiplespecies recovery planning should befocused on species with similar threatsrather than co-occurrence (see Clark& Harvey 2002). The four IAS threatabatement plans outlined here pro-vide conservation outcomes for morethan 130 species – approximately 100of which are formally listed as threat-ened under the TSC Act. The numberof species impacts is likely to increaseas information on the species affectedbecomes available, for example thedraft Bitou TAP identifies another 70species potentially at risk for whichinsufficient data was available tomodel their impacts (DEC 2004).

The preparation of the four threatabatement plans discussed hereprovide models for future IAS threatabatement plans. However, thesuccess of this approach of combiningIAS management and biodiversityconservation is dependent on thesupport and implementation on theground of these plans by stakeholders,land managers and the widercommunity. In addition, wheremultiple threats are present theimplementation of recovery plans willaid broader biodiversity conservation.

References:

Clark, J.A. & Harvey, E. (2002). Assessingmulti-species recovery plans under theendangered species act. EcologicalApplications 12(3), 655-662.

DEC (in prep.). Draft Threat Abatement Planfor Predation by the Feral Cat (Felis catus).NSW Department of Environment andConservation. Hurstville, NSW.

DEC (2004). Draft Threat Abatement Planfor Invasion of Native Plant Communitiesby bitou bush/boneseed (Chrysanthemoidesmonilifera). NSW Department ofEnvironment and Conservation. Hurstville,NSW.

Downey, P.O. (2003a). Invasive species andplant conservation: woody weeds. In: C.L.Brown, F. Hall, & J. Mill (eds) PlantConservation: approaches and techniquesfrom an Australian perspective. Module 4(pages unnumbered), Australian Networkfor Plant Conservation, EnvironmentAustralia, Canberra.

Downey, P.O. (2003b). Threat abatementplans: weeds and plant conservation. In:Proceedings of the 12th NSW Biennial Nox-ious Weeds Conference. (pages unnumbered),Greater Taree City Council, Taree.

Downey, P.O. (2004). Bitou bush managementand plant conservation: establishing priori-ties for control. In: B.M. Sindel & S. Johnson(eds) The Proceedings of the 14th AustralianWeeds Conference. pp. in press, R.G. & F.J.Richardson, Melbourne.

Downey, P.O. & Leys, A.R. (2004). Weeds askey threatening processes: implications formanaging environmental weeds. In: B.M.Sindel & S. Johnson (eds) The Proceedingsof the 14th Australian Weeds Conference.pp. in press, R.G. & F.J. Richardson, Mel-bourne.

English, A.W. & Chapple, R.S. (2002). TheManagement of Feral Animals in NationalParks in New South Wales. University ofSydney, Sydney

IUCN (The World Conservation Union)(2000). IUCN Guidelines for the Preventionof Biodiversity Loss Caused by AlienInvasive Species. website: http://www.iucn.org/themes/ssc/pubs/policy/invasivesEng.htm (Species SurvivalCommission, Invasive Species SpecialistGroup, IUCN, Switzerland).

Mahon, P. (2000). The New South WalesThreat Abatement Plan for Predation by theRed Fox. In: S. Balogh (ed.) Proceedingsof the NSW Pest Animal ControlConference. pp. 39-47. NSW Agriculture,Orange.

NPWS (2001). Threat Abatement Plan forPredation by the Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes).NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service.Hurstville, NSW.

NPWS (2003). Threat Abatement Plan forPredation by Gambusia holbrooki – ThePlague Minnow. NSW National Parks andWildlife Service. Hurstville, NSW.

NPWS (2004). Key threatening processes andthreat abatement planning. NSW NationalParks and Wildlife Service. Hurstville,NSW. website:

http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/npws.nsf/Content/Threat+abatement+planning

Saunders, G., Coman, B., Kinnear, J. andBraysher, M. (1995). ManagingVertebrate Pests: foxes. AGPS, Canberra.

Paul Downey, Paul Mahon, RonHaering & Andrew LeysPest Management Unit,Parks and Wildlife Division,AustraliaEmail:paul.downey@npws.nsw.gov.au

ALIEN FISH IN RIVER DOCE STATE PARK, BRAZIL AND THE NATIVE FISH EXTINCTIONIN TROPICAL LAKES; PROPOSAL FOR ALIEN SPECIES MNAGEMENT MANAGEMENT

The Atlantic Forest Biome, in Brazil, is one of most impor-tant biodiversity hot spots on the planet, due to the spe-cies endemism and threat levels (Conservation Interna-tional). There are approximately 140 lakes at River DoceBasin, with 1/3 (about 26) of fish species of the basin.Among these, 56 are placed in the left margin of the RiverDoce and of these, 32 in River Doce State Park, a naturalreserve with 36,000 ha of Atlantic Forest. These character-istics added to the geological formation, the system occur-rence in Atlantic Forest Biome and the presence of theendemic dog fish, Oligosarcus solitarius (Menezes 1987)are important to consider this system as unique in Braziland of “special” biological importance to the conservationof fish in south-eastern Brazil (Biodivesitas Foundation).

In these lakes there were successive invasions of fish fromother basins of South America as well as African andAsian basins. The first introductions, in the early 1970’s,were of peacock bass (Cichla ocellaris) (Bloch &Schneider, 1801) and red piranha (Pygocentrus nattereri)(Kner, 1858). In the late 1990’s, the oscar, Astronotusocellatus (Agassiz, 1831) was introduced, as well as theAfrican catfish, (Clarias gariepinus) (Burchell, 1822), thetambaqui, (Colossoma macropomu) (Curvier, 1818) andtilapia, (Oreochromis niloticus niloticus) (Linnaeus, 1758)by accidental aquaculture escapes. The singing catfish,(Hoplosternum litoralle) (Hancock, 1828) was introducedmore recently for its use as bait for fishing.

After alien fish colonisation in lakes outside River DocePark, the regional dispersion, including the Park andneighbouring areas, has continued using two methods: i)the linkage, in high rainy seasons, among lakes andstreams, establishing temporal invasion corridors, and;ii) local people fishing for alien species either for sport orfood. Consequently, there has been a massive extinctionof fish species in these lakes, reducing the species rich-ness and diversity of the fish community. Extreme situa-tions occur where there are only three fish species in alake, one native and two alien (peacock bass and red pira-nha). The native species extinction possibly results fromthe high predation and competition abilities of the alienspecies. Most of these fish show strong parental care andhave an ictiophagous diet. The only native species that isnot threatened by alien species, at least, not in any greatnumbers, is the wolf fish, (Hoplias malabaricus) (Bloch)which also shows parental care and has an ictiophagousdiet.

Recently we reported that the alien fish occurrence can beexplained using models based on distances between lakesand streams, which corroborates their linkage as an impor-tant dispersion corridor. These distances are inversely re-lated with the permeability of the corridors and hence withthe probability of alien species spread among lakes. Lakesthat “escape” this rule present the same alien species thatare preferred by local people.

Abiotic conditions (pH, turbidity, oxygen, conductivity)of Doce River lakes are very different from conditions ofthe original basins of alien species (e.g. Amazonian Basin),but this did not affect the colonisation potential and theabundance of these alien species - this is evidence of thehigh efficiency of these species in colonising new basins.

When putting together the information on incidence ofalien species, their effects on the native community, thedispersion forms among lakes and the occurrence underconditions that are varied as well as very diferentfrom thoseof the original basin, it is possible that the use of tradi-tional management techniques, such as the exclusion byfisheries, do not obtain satisfactory results. Alien fish eradi-cation programs have frequently produced results that werebelow expectation due to the high economic costs, theinefficiency of methods and the unexpected effects onother ecosystem elements such as native species (theseeffects are almost impossible to avoid in the aquatic eco-system).

Based on this information, the Grupo de Ecologia deOrganismos Invasores and the Laboratório de EcologiaQuantitativa (Universidade Federal de Viçosa), are com-bining their efforts on a management plan, with the initialaim to reduce the potential spread by local people. Whilepreparing this plan, we are also developing models to pre-dict areas of great susceptibility to fish invasions (consid-ering biotic and abiotic aspects), with the aim of reducingthe further future impacts.

Anderson Oliveira LatiniGrupo de Ecologia de Organismos InvasoresLaboratório de Ecologia Quantitativa – Depto. BiologiaGeralUniversidade Federal de Viçosa, BrazilEmail: aolatini@bol.com.br

INTERNATIONAL PET ANT TRADEINCREASING RISK AND DANGER IN EUROPE - (HYMENOPTERA, FORMICIDAE )

SummaryIn Europe, Austria, France, Germany, Spain and UK, for thepast few years an ever-increasing trade in pet ants hasbeen observed. Internet companies provide formicaries,accessories and living ants of European origin, as well asfrom overseas (South America, Indonesia, Australia).

In this article I discuss various risks of this trade: escapingants may establish and cause economic or biodiversityimpacts, carry diseases that switch over to indigenousspecies and bastardise local faunas. Even “intraspecific”faunal bastardisation may occur.

I suggest urging governments of all nations to ban thetrade of invertebrate species, in particular ants and exoticspecies, for commercial and non-scientific purposes. Ex-ceptional permits should only be granted when escape-proof keeping can be guaranteed.

IntroductionDuring the past 2-3 years, there has been an ever-increas-ing interest in keeping various ant species as pets at home.In the US it is illegal to trade ant queens, however, in Eu-rope, where restrictions are mostly lacking, a couple ofInternet-shops have established where the ant keepers canorder living ant colonies, formicaries and accessories. Sincethese shops advertise and sell ants from nearly all over theworld, there is some cause for concern. Information on theamount of this trade can be obtained from a number ofInternet forums (URLs given below). From the forums it isalso clearly recognizable that the species in question areusually not identified, often sold under wrong names orjust with a genus name, e.g. “Pheidole sp.”, this being agenus with 900 species worldwide, among them severalalready known as major pests.

I – The risk of bastardisation of faunasAs with any intended or casual release of foreign organ-isms in a given ecosystem, the exotic species in a few in-stances may establish viable populations and thusbastardise the local faunas. Even known invasive ant spe-cies may be released in countries where they have notbeen found as yet, because the dealers and customers aslaymen are unable to differentiate between hazardous and(perhaps) harmless congeners.

Ants in particular are a greater risk to local faunas thanother exotic organisms: They are generally highly domi-nant members in most terrestrial ecosystems. And, if re-leased, it is usually not one or a few single specimens thatmay die before having the chance to reproduce (as forexample the numerous spiders, millipedes, scorpions, man-tids etc coming free every year). A complete ant colony,whether escaped or set free by the keeper may find andreorganize itself in a suitable place and, provided thatfavourable ecological conditions are given, begin to re-produce. Potential inbreeding among the progeny of a

single queen is not a serious problem in ants, as is oftenerroneously believed. In any case most (potentially) inva-sive species are polygynous and have several reproduc-ing queens in a colony. Pet ant keepers prefer polygynousant species because they are believed to survive longer incaptivity. In addition, “spectacular” species are soughtafter, such as the Australian bull ants (Myrmecia sp.), orleafcutter ants (Atta and Acromyrmex spp.) and weaverants (Oecophylla sp.) - all offered for sale in Germany andother European countries.

II – The risk of developing additional pest and/or invasiveant speciesGermany presently is plagued by about a dozen introducedant species. Most of them are confined to hot houses,green houses of Botanical gardens, zoos etc. A few areinvading homes, hospitals, restaurants etc., among themthe Pharaoh’s ant, but also a few Pheidole species. Otherssurviving in the open are the Argentine Ant (Linepithemahumile) and Lasius neglectus (Dekoninck et al 2002; seealso http://www.creaf.uab.es/xeg/Lasius/Ingles/index.htm). Both have the potential of eradicating numer-ous native ant species.

Most pest ants probably have arisen from widespreadsynanthropic species that have been carried around theworld through traditional commerce. Pet ant keepers anddealers are always demanding “new”, “interesting” spe-cies. Ant collectors and dealers will hence try to bring evermore species from nature hat never had the “chance” to bedistributed by man. Among the numerous Pheidole spe-cies that are very popular because of their big-headed sol-dier caste, there may be dozens of potential pest ants.

Since both dealers and customers are laymen, they areunable to correctly identify the ant species in question.Many are sold with evidently incorrect (nonexisting) names,or only identified up to the genus (Pheidole, Messor andothers). Ant taxonomy is very difficult, even for the fewcontemporary professional myrmecologists, and manygroups (genera) are taxonomically unsettled as yet, so it isabsolutely impossible both for dealers and customers toassess whether or not a given species may be an actual, orpossibly future, pest.

III – The risk of ant parasites switching over to nativespeciesAll animals carry parasites, which, if released in a foreignhabitat, may switch over to native species, threateningthem, even if the original host species cannot survive inthe new environment. These parasites may be mites, nema-todes, protozoans, fungi, bacteria etc. Some ant speciesare known to be intermediate hosts of tapeworms. In south-ern France a Tetramorium species is known to carry a tape-worm infesting domestic fowl (genus Raillietina; Nadakalet al 1971).

As yet, extremely little has been known on the parasitefauna of ants, but I have done some studies on tapeworms(Buschinger 1973), on fungi (Sanchez-Peña et al. 1993),and on gregarines, all found in ants (Kleespies et al 1997),so I have good reason to infer that many more ant speciesmay carry one or other potentially dangerous parasite spe-cies. A gregarine species found in North American,Leptothorax ants from Montana, were able to infest Euro-pean Leptothorax in laboratory experiments, and even thePharaoh’s ant. Unfortunately it did not affect this speciesto an extent where its use for biological control would bejustified (Buschinger & Kleespies 1999). Though appar-ently no incidence of such a parasite transfer among for-eign and native ants has been recorded as yet, it neverthe-less appears a real possibility.

IV – “Intraspecific bastardisation of fauna” – a neglectedriskWith “intraspecific bastardisation of fauna” I mean thatnot only the introduction of a foreign species into a nativefauna or ecosystem may become hazardous, but also theintroduction of members of a species into distant popula-tions of the same species. In Europe there are numerousspecies with a very wide range, from Mediterranean throughsub arctic habitats. We may assume that their local popu-lations usually have developed special adaptations to thelocal climatic conditions etc. If transferred to a sufficientlydistant place they may either disappear (if they do nottolerate the local conditions – the best case), or hybridisewith the resident population, which might weaken theadaptiveness of the local population. A further problem inthis context is that expensive studies on biogeographyand phylogeography may be jeopardized.

One frequently studied question in Europe is whether agiven species has arrived from the Mediterranean refugia,after the ice age, to the North of the Alps via the eastern orwestern route. With modern DNA techniques it is possibleto reconstruct such routes, but if (for example) an ant spe-

cies from France escapes in eastern Austria and by chanceestablishes a population there, this may invalidate a lot ofresearch efforts.

V – URLs of Internet ant-sellers and forums

German “antstore” http://www.antstore.de (238 mem-bers as at 15 January 2004)German Ameisenforum http://www.ameisenforum.dewith a lot of discussions on the topic of introduction ofexotic ants. (559 members, many of them also in the antstoreforum).France http://www.akolab.com/fourmis/forum/index.php(in French; forum but also trading ants) (274 members)Spain http://www.upseros.com/comunidad/hormigas/phpbb2/index.php (forum which doesn’t advertise ants,but the owner sells ants on demand by e-mail) (258 mem-bers).Great Britain http://www.zsuk.co.uk/ presently doesnot advertise ants, but has formerly sold many colonies,e.g. leafcutter ants. Not all of the registered forum mem-bers are ant keepers, but quite a high number are.

The German antstore in particular is importing ants fromAustralia, SE-Asia, and Central America to Europe, andalso distributes ants from southern Europe in central andnorthern Europe. In Germany and most European coun-tries there is no legal restriction on the trade with exoticanimals, except for those endangered in their countries oforigin.

As yet, there is no ant species known which would beendangered by taking them from the field in their countriesof origin. I do know only about restrictions in the USAwhere trading ant queens (not workers) across borders isillegal. The American Forum for ant enthusiasts, wherethese restrictions are frequently discussed is: http://pub8.ezboard.com/bantfarm (608 members on 15 January2004).

VI – ConclusionOf course, ants are not only imported by those specialisedcompanies, but as yet mainly by ordinary trade (with plants,fruit, wood etc.), and also many colonies are taken homeby tourists. However, trading pet ant colonies may consid-erably increase the numbers of imported colonies and alsoof additional species, handed over to private customers -who can be as young as 12-13 years old.

I think it would be worthwhile for IUCN (and othes) toinform the governments of all nations on this quite recentdevelopment, suggesting legal restrictions on exoticarthropode trade, both because of dangers for their nativefaunas and of additional invasive species whose eradica-tion is always very expensive and nevertheless usuallyfails (see fire Ants, Pharao’s ant, Argentine ant etc.; VANDER

MEER et al. 1990).

ReferencesBuschinger, A., 1973: Ameisen des Tribus Leptothoracini

(Hym., Formicidae) als Zwischenwirte von Cestoden.Zool. Anz. 191, 369-380, 1973

Buschinger, A., Kleespies, R. 1999: Host range and hostspecificity of an ant-pathogenic gregarine parasite,Mattesia geminata (Neogregarinida: Lipotrophidae).Entomol. Gener. 24, 93-104.

Dekoninck, W., C. De Baere, J. Mertens & J-P. Maelfait, 2002.On the arrival of the Asian invader ant Lasius neglectus inBelgium (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Bull. Soc. roy. belg.Ent. 138: 45-48.

Kleespies, R.G., Huger, A.M., Buschinger, A., Nähring, S.,Schumann, R.D., 1997: Studies on the life history of aneogregarine parasite found in Leptothorax ants fromNorth America. Biocontrol Science and Technology 7,117-129.

Nadakal, A.M., A. Mohandas, K.O. John, and K.Muraleedharan, 1971. Resistance potential of certain breedsof domestic fowl exposed to Raillietina tetragona infections.3. species of ants an intermediate hosts for certain fowl ces-todes. Poultry Sci. 50:115-118.

Sanchez-Peña, S.R., Buschinger, A., Humber, R.A. 1993:Myrmicinosporidium durum, an enigmatic fungal para-site of ants. J. Invertebrate Pathol. 61, 90-96.

A. BuschingerZoological Institute,Darmstadt University of Technology,Schnittspahnstrasse 3, D-64287 Darmstadt,Germany,Email: buschinger@bio.tu-darmstadt.deMember of the IUCN SSC, Social Insect Specialist Group

ghghghghghghghgh

Mimosa pigra in Lochinvar NationalPark, a Ramsar site in Southern

Zambia: Looming ecological disaster?

Intr oduction

The Kafue Flats are perhaps one of the world’s largestand most biologically diverse floodplain systems. Thefloodplain lies entirely within the Kafue basin catchmentarea and supports fifty percent (50%) of Zambia’s totalpopulation. Lying almost entirely in the Southern Prov-ince of Zambia, the floodplain normally floods to an enor-mous extent of about 5,000 to 6,500km2 at the peak of theflood period in March. The floodplain hosts two of theworld-renowned protected areas, the Lochinvar and BlueLagoon National Park both Ramsar sites.

The floodplain is currently sandwiched between two largedams which are located approximately 300 km apart.These dams have completely altered the hydrological re-gime of the system. Backwater from the downstream damand dry season releases from upstream one have createda permanently flooded area within the floodplain that wasnot present in the past. The ecological consequences ofthese changes for the floodplain, which hosts two nationalparks more so Lochinvar, have been extensive. Hydro-logical and vegetation changes have impacted the habitatfor important local and wildlife communities includingan endemic and semi-aquatic antelope known as the Kafuelechwe (Kobus leche kafuensis). Lochinvar is also re-nowned for its large numbers of bird life, both migratoryand resident. In fact over 400 species have been recordedin the area. Water birds are especially abundant and ofparticular interest are the wattled cranes (Bugeranuscarunculatus). These are rare and considered endangeredin the IUCN Red Data List. Other birdlife exist in thearea with the common ones being cormorants, darters,pelicans, goliath herons, ospreys, kingfishers and fisheagles. The flats are important grazing grounds for thepastoral tribes that have been dependent on them for hun-dreds of year feeding area for cattle for the Tonga and Ilatribes. These tribes have been dependant on the variedfunctions, products and attributes of the Kafue Flats wet-land system. The changes have also been compoundedby the severe droughts that have affected the area in therecent past.

Mimosa invasion

The most dramatic change in vegetation is associated withthe colonisation of parts of the floodplain by the invasivealien plant, Mimosa pigra (Figure 1& 2). Initially sightedand reported in the early 1980s (Thompson, 1986). Un-known to park managers, the plant spread over the yearswithin the park and the adjacent buffer zone called theGame Management Area (GMA). Unmanaged andunmonitored it has spread extensively, especially withinLochinvar National park encroaching over 2,000 ha of

NEW REGULATIONS TO KEEP “INVASIVE” SPE-CIES OUT OF BALLAST WATER

On 13 February 2004 over 100 countries signed a UNtreaty that seeks to regulate ballast water managementin the shipping industry. The two-tiered treaty, 10 yearsin the making, is sponsored by the UN’s InternationalMaritime Organisation (IMO). The first tier includesregulations that apply to all ships, while Tier 2 givescountries the option to take additional measures be-fore allowing ships to enter their ports. After muchdeliberation, countries agreed on a phase-in period fordifferent regulations, beginning in 2009 and ending in2016.

NOTES

grassland area. The plant has also affected other areas in the world such asKakadu National Park (a Ramsar site) in Australia and other areas in Vietnam(e.g. Lonsdale et al, 1985). This plant clearly monospecific within the flatsimplying that is taking up critical grassland habitats and replacing the nativevegetation of the area.

Conclusion

Could such an infestation qualify for a possible ecological disaster? This is acritical question that needs to be answered. The site is clearly degraded andhas undergone changes in ecological character. Habitat fragmentation hastaken place within the floodplain particularly within the protected area(Lochinvar National Park). With the advancing invasion, most of the graz-ing ground for the antelope and other wildlife is being taken over. Clearly thenative vegetation in the flats is being out-competed and the whole wetlandhas been subject to relatively rapid change. There is critical need to learnabout invasion dynamics in wetland ecosystems in Zambia. Preliminarypalaeoecological results from my study have indicated that this plant did notexist in the flats in the early 1900s and some plant species observed within the

sediment core collected at Lochinvardo not seem to exist now. Not only isthe mimosa infestation a major envi-ronmental threat but also an economicone. Unfortunately little is known onthe socio-economic impacts of thisspecies of local livelihoods and clearlythe invasion is interfering with thelifestyle of the local communities andhence the impacts need to be investi-gated. The need to manage this inva-sion cannot be overemphasized andthe time to do it is sooner than later.

References:

Thompson, S.R. 1986 Mimosa pigrain an African National Park,Aquaphyte

Londsdale, W.M., Harley, K.L.S. &Miller, I.L. 1985. The biology of Mi-mosa pigra L. In Proceedings of the10th Asia-Pacific Weed Science Soci-ety Conference, Chiang Mai. Depart-ment of Agriculture, Thailand, pp.484- 90.

Musonda MumbaDepartment of GeographyWetland Research UnitUniversity College LondonEmail: m.mumba@geog.ucl.ac.uk

Photos: M Mumba

Figure 1 – Mimosa growing in Lochinvar National Park

Figure 2 - Mimosa pod in Lochinvar NP

TRUSTS, THE COMMUNITY AND CONSERVATION

This article outlines my experiences with being with aTrust and the lessons I’ve learnt that I believe are appli-cable to the formation and operation of all Trusts or Com-munity organizations involved in conservation. The Manawahe Kokako Trust was initiated after a talkgiven by myself (as a Department of Conservation Ranger)to the Whakatane Rotary Club on the “Recovery of kokako(Callaeas cinerea) in the Te Urewera National Park”.After the meeting I was approached by several memberswho said they were looking for a project that they couldfinancially support as well as have hands on involvement.I suggested that the protection of kokako at Manawahecould be an option. I approached the farmers and a for-estry company, on whose land the birds were resident andwas given verbal approval for animal control for protec-tion of kokako on their properties. This I did as a privatecitizen not a DoC employee and all my subsequent in-volvement with the Trust has been in that capacity. Kokako had been taken from this area in 1993 to go toKapiti Island and there was some ill feeling towards De-partment of Conservation as there had been no follow upinformation given to the residents on the kokako’s fate,also there was a concern expressed that the remnantkokako might be taken in a similar fashion if it suited thedepartment. The Trust comprised of local landowners, two Depart-ment of Conservation employees (Jeff Hudson and GrantJones) and three Rotarians, one an ex mayor.The Trust document used was copied from the existingKaharoa Trust document. It was altered to suit theManawahe situation where consultation with the Depart-ment of Conservation was desirable but not necessary (TheKaharoa Trust project is on Department of Conservationadministrated land which requires the Trust to follow De-partmental guidelines). The Whakatane Rotary Club gifted $3000 seeding moneyto the Trust as well as $500 from membership fees fromRotarians. Experience of successful kokako protection in the TeUrewera was the model used in laying out bait stationslines and pulsing toxin fills in kokako territories. Successwas obvious from the first breeding season where fourkokako chicks were seen post breeding. This was the onlyform of monitoring undertaken.It was felt exact replication of proven methods shouldproduce the same kokako recovery once removal of ratsand possum had been achieved. To do further monitoring would require major expendi-ture beyond the skill and time allowed by most membersi.e. contractors would have to be employed.

Trustee’s and trust members and volunteers go out 5 or 6weekends during the year filling bait stations and re open-ing or cutting tracks. The work is usually finished bylunchtime and is followed by a barbecue. Kokako are usu-ally seen in the course of this work which is very inspir-ing for the members. Two open days are held a year withup to 50 people at a time taken to see the birds. Thisproject has a very high profile in the local communitywith a couple of newspaper articles on the project eachyear. Results to DateIn 1998, there were 4 pairs at Manawahe by 2004 therewere 19 pairs. Most of these will be young birds and thebreeding capacity is expected to increase each year. Theoriginal protection area was about 150 hectares and thishas been increased to 250 hectares. Funding to DateAfter the original seeding funds from Rotary, sponsor-ship has come from

· Fletcher Forests· State Insurance· Whakatane District Council

And now our major and only sponsor is the bay of PlentyRegional Council which has supplied $27000 over threeyears from the Environmental Enhancement Fund. Thismoney was used for increasing the protection area as wellas paying for monitoring costs of rats, possums andkokako, a condition of funding. KEY LESSONS

1. The ease at which Trusts can be set up2. Membership should be apolitical;That way it engenders support from the wider commu-

nity without isolating or predetermining support.3. The issue should be local4. Achievable targets set with visible results ob-

tained within a short timeframe5. Core volunteers not to be overworked; Core num-

bers at Manawahe are usually 8 regulars with maybeanother six at times. They all have full time jobs so anyvoluntary work should not remove a whole weekend.More extensive work beyond their capacity should becontracted out

6. A Community conservation Trust needs a socialaspect where people can enjoy being together as well asworking together. Diverse membership enhances thisrelationship.

Expertise- Manawahe and Kaharoa Trusts both haveDepartmental volunteers as members and Trustee’s. Thisensures that the most efficient and up to date methodsare used and gives real direction and efficiency to theirprojects. Trust groups can waste a lot of time and moneythrough ignorance and in the end not obtain the resultsthey were after, thus undermining their aims and jeop-ardizing the Trust itself.

Success breeds success

7. A Trust needs to be established with an efficient,well-balanced and mixed expertise group, this allowsthe expertise within the group to bid easily and success-fully for new funds. By this I mean the inclusion of peoplewith business skills and people with outdoor expertise.

8. Trust projects need not to be expensive if theyhave capable volunteers willing to undertake the major-ity of tasks in their project.

9. The most important lesson is how much good-will there is in the community for these sorts of trusts tosucceed!!!

Conservation Trusts have made a significant contribu-tion to the National recovery of at least one threatenedspecies.Of the three largest populations of kokako in the Bay ofPlenty, two; Kaharoa and Manawahe, are managed byTrusts not by the Department of Conservation.The Department of Conservation Kokako Recovery Plan’slong-term goal is to have 1000 pairs of kokako by 2020in 23 managed sites. The work undertaken by these Trustsis a significant contribution to this goal.It also must be recognized that the Department is un-likely to achieve many of its aims unless the communityundertakes an active role in conservation, whether is onpublic land or not.If conservation is to be undertaken on private land theDepartments resources are unlikely to be stretched to as-sist except in the most minimal way.

Jeff HudsonManawahe Trust

TAXONOMY TARGETING INVASIVES (PUB-LISHED BY BIONET- INTERNATIONAL)

From the introduction: “This collection of case studies,drawn from the Why Taxonomy Matters series, illus-trates the role of taxonomy in Invasive Alien Species(IAS) management. With examples from various sec-tors, the case studies highlight how taxonomic exper-tise, surveys, information and analysis are of crucial im-portance to recognising and solving ecological, agricul-tural, trade, health and other problems caused by IAS.Taxonomy is a critical tool for combating the threat fromIAS.

Without access to expert support, misidentifications aremade, costing precious money and time when rapid de-cisions need to be made, for example at border postsand regulatory agencies. Only when a suspected IAS iscorrectly identified can effective control or mitigationmeasures be implemented, drawing where possible onbest practice learnt from tackling the IAS elsewhere.Prompt and reliable identifications, supported by net-working that promotes the sharing of experiences, infor-mation and expertise, may eliminate the need for costlyeradication programmes. Where elimination programmesare needed, taxonomists help to develop the most envi-ronmentally benign, economic yet effective methods.

Taxonomic knowledge and skills are at the centre of anti-IAS measures. Expertise needs to be mobilised andshared. Taxonomic capacities need to be accessible to allcountries to support the prompt identification and moni-toring of IAS threats and delivery of control programmes.Capacity is being developed but significant further in-vestment is required. Is this difficult to justify when thebenefits far outweigh the costs at ratios such as 50:1?”

BioNET-INTERNATIONAL, the Global Network for Tax-onomy, is an initiative that promotes demand-driven ca-pacity building in taxonomy to address sustainable de-velopment needs of developing countries

Further information:BioNET-INTERNATIONAL: www.bionet-intl.org

PUBLICATIONS

Photo: Sarah King

ISSG IS PROUD TO ANNOUNCE the Translationand reprint of the 100 of the W orld’ s Worst Inva-sive Alien Species booklet.

Lowe S., Browne M., Boudjelas S., De Poorter M. (2004)100 de las Especies Exóticas Invasoras más dañinas delmundo. Una selección del Global Invasive SpeciesDatabase. Publicado por el Grupo Especialista de EspeciesInvasoras (GEEI), un grupo especialista de la Comisiónde Supervivencia de Especies (CSE) de la Unión Mundialpara la Naturaleza (UICN), 12pp. Primera edición, eninglés, sacada junto con el número 12 de la revista Aliens,Diciembre 2000. Versión traducida y actualizada:Noviembre 2004.

Lowe S., Browne M., Boudjelas S., De Poorter M. (2000)100 of the World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species A selectionfrom the Global Invasive Species Database. Publishedby The Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) aspecialist group of the Species Survival Commission (SSC)of the World Conservation Union (IUCN), 12pp. Firstpublished as special lift-out in Aliens 12, December 2000.Updated and reprinted version: November 2004.

S. Lowe, M. Browne, S. Boudjelas, M De Poorter (2004)100 des Pires Espèces Exotiques Envahissantes dumonde. Une Selection à partir de la Global InvasiveSpecies Database. Publié par le Groupe de spécialistesdes espèces envahissantes (GSEE) un groupe despécialistes de la Commission de la sauvegarde des espèces(CSE)) de l’Union mondiale pour la nature (UICN) 12pp.première edition (en anglais), en tant qu’ encart dansAliens du 12 Décembre 2000. Version traduite et mise àjour : Novembre 2004.

With acknowledgements to BioNET-INTERNA-TIONAL for its financial support, and many thanksBernardo Zilletti and Laura Capdevila-Argüelles (G.E.I.Grupo Especies Invasoras, España) for providing theSpanish translation.

For a hardcopy, contact issg@auckland.ac.nz. Pdfversions are available on the ISSG website.

NOW AVAILABLE ON LINE:TURNING THE TIDE: THE ERADICATION OFINVASIVE SPECIES

Proceedings of the International Conference onEradication of Island InvasivesEdited by C. R. Veitch and M. N. Clout

The Proceedings of the International Conference onEradication of Island Invasives, held at the University ofAuckland in February 2001, is now available online:.

This 424 page book titled: “Turning the Tide: TheEradication of Invasive Species”, edited by Dick Veitchand Mick Clout, contains 52 papers from conferencepresentations and the abstracts from a further 21 of thepresentations.

Download from: http://www.issg.org/Eradicat.html

Hardcopy available (for sale) at ISSG office. Proceeds ofthe hard copy support ISSG’s work.

Recent publications from GISP (2004)include:

Regional workshop proceedings and national reports :They can be downloaded from the GISP website. A lim-ited number of hard copies have been printed (contactGISP for further information)

Southern Africa:Prevention and management of invasive alien species: pro-ceedings of a workshop on forging cooperation through-out southern Africa [551 KB]Invasive alien species in southern Africa: national reportsand directory of resources [1.29MB]South and Southeast Asia:Prevention and management of invasive alien species: pro-ceedings of a workshop on forging cooperation through-out South and Southeast Asia [625 KB]Invasive alien species in South-Southeast Asia: nationalreports and directory of resources [656 KB]Austral-Pacific region:Prevention and management of invasive alien species: pro-ceedings of a workshop on forging cooperation through-out the Austral-Pacific [1.8 MB]Invasive alien species in the Austral-Pacific region: na-tional reports and directory of resources [3.75 MB]These reports are the products of three regional work-shops convened by GISP and its partners in 2002 to as-sess invasive alien species challenges and opportunitiesfor regional collaborationPlease contact GISP at gisp@nbi.ac.za if you have anyproblems downloading the documents of your choice. West African r egion:Prevention and management of alien species:forging co-operation throughout West Africa English (pdf, 2.2 MB )French (pdf 2.39 MB)

Source:Dr Phoebe BarnardGlobal Invasive Species Programmewww.gisp.org

Pathways of Introduction ofForest Insect s and Pathogens

Situation

Forests in North America have suffered enormous damagecaused by insects and diseases introduced from abroad.Several tree species have been virtually eliminated asintegral components of the forest, including the Americanchestnut (Castanea dentata (Marsh.) Borkh.). Otherspecies have undergone severe declines. As these treesdisappear, the entire ecosystem is affected. For example,the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) depends uponthe seeds of the whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis Engelm.)for fattening up before its hibernation. Yet ninety percentof whitebark pines in the northern Rocky Mountains havebeen killed by the introduced pathogen white pine blisterrust (Cronartium ribicola J.C. Fisch.).

Significant but less damage has been caused by suchintroductions on other continents. In Asia, most damaginghas been the pinewood nematode (Bursaphelenchuslignicolus (xylophilus)). The nematode has spreadessentially throughout Japan and in several provinces inChina. In Japan, annual loss of pine timber was 2.4 millioncubic meters by the 1970’s. First detected in China In early1980’s, the nematode has caused significant economiclosses despite strict measures aimed at mitigating the

ISSGANNIVERSARY

1993/4 - 2004!!!!

A SAMPLE OFACTIVITIES ANDINTERESTS OFISSG MEMBERSAND ISSG STAFF

damage. Insects introduced more recently, such asDendroctonus valens, are also causing damage. Anoutbreak of this insect in the 1990s has killed more than 6million trees, especially Pinus tabuliformus and P. ungeana– cultural importance.

In Europe, the Asian longhorned beeetle (Anoplophoraglabripennis) has been introduced in Austria, France, andGermany; its close relative, the citrus longhorned beetle(Anoplophora) is established in Italy. The pinewoodnematode is established in Portugal. The sudden oak deathpathogen (Phytophthora ramorum) has been found innurseries in 12 countries; the pathogen has spread fromthe nurseries to landscape trees in the United Kingdomand the Netherlands.

In South Africa and New Zealand, there have been severalintroductions of insects or pathogens that threaten exotictrees used in plantation forestry or as windbreaks, or inamenity plantings.

Efforts to manage important pathways for introduction offorest insects and diseases

Experts have identified four important pathways for theintroduction of forest insects and diseases: imports of 1)forest products (logs, lumber, chips); 2) wood packaging;or 3) woody plants; and 4) hitchhikers on shipsuperstructures. None is adequately regulated at presentto curtail introductions. However, promising efforts areunder way at the international or regional levels with regardto the last three.

1) Imports of forest products (logs, lumber, chips)The most famous example of a damaging introduction vialog imports is that of Dutch elm disease (Ophiostoma ulmi(Buis.) Narruf.) to North America in the 1930s. Individualcountries currently regulate such imports – sometimes in apiecemeal fashion. For example, following completion of arisk assessment, the United States requires that imports ofconiferous logs and lumber from Siberia and most of Chinabe subjected to heat treatment (56oC for 30 minutes) in theexporting country. In contrast, the same species andcommodities may be imported from Europe without priortreatment if the importer promises to ship them immediatelyto a government-approved facility for heat treatment within30 days. No pest risk assessment has analyzed the riskposed by these latter imports.

2) Wood packagingWood packaging is the pathway by which the Asianlonghorned beetle (Anaplophora glabripennis), pine woodnematode (Bursaphelenchus lignicolus), and otherinvertebrates are moved. Since inspection is not effectivein preventing introductions via this pathway, the partiesto the International Plant Protection Convention haveadopted an international standard (ISPM # 15, “Guidelinesfor Regulating Wood Packaging Material in InternationalTrade”) which requires that all wood used in packaging be

treated by either heat treatment or fumigation. However,these treatments will not eliminate all potential forest pestsfrom this pathway. Concern focuses primarily on two issues:whether allowing bark to be present will reduce the efficacyof the treatment measures; and whether wood packagingcan be re-infested with damaging organisms after it hasbeen treated.

3) Imports of woody plantsMore than a dozen damaging insects and plant diseaseshave probably been introduced to North America via tradein woody plants, including the chestnut blight(Cryphonectria parasitica (Murr.) Barr). Alarmed by theapparently increasing frequency of such introductions,forest management and phytosanitary agencies in the UnitedStates, Canada, and Mexico have begun developing a NorthAmerican regional standard for imports of living plant. Thedraft standard emphasizes a systems approach incorporatingcertification of nurseries as producing “clean stock”, andstrict record-keeping to facilitate tracing of plants found tobe infested or diseased.

4) Superstructures of ships, containers, and automobilesMoths in the Lymantridae family (gypsy moths and relatedinsects) attach egg masses to virtually any hard, verticalsurface, including ship superstructures, shippingcontainers, and automobiles. To prevent transport of thesedamaging insects, the United States funds a program underwhich Russian officials inspect cargo ships in Siberian portsbefore their departure. To reduce moth concentrations nearharbors, officials turn of artificial lights during flight periodsand carry out suppression trapping of the insects. Canada,Australia, New Zealand, and Chile also receive informationabout pest levels in the Siberian ports. This effective programshould be expanded to include other Asian countries inwhich the same moth species are found.

Faith CampbellThe Nature ConservancyEmail: Phytodoer@aol.com

INVASIVE SPECIES SPECIALIST GROUP (ISSG) REPORT AUGUST 2004

The Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) is a net-work of expert volunteers, organised under the auspicesof the Species Survival Commission of IUCN (The WorldConservation Union).

The Invasive Species Specialist Group was establishedin 1993. It currently has around 160 voluntary membersfrom over 40 countries and is chaired by Prof Mick Cloutat the University of Auckland (UOA), New Zealand. TheISSG office employs 7 permanent staff. The mission ofISSG is: “to r educe threats to natural ecosystems andthe native species they contain, by increasing awarenessof alien invasions and of ways to prevent, control or eradi-cate them”.

Invasive Alien Species (IAS) are found in all taxonomicgroups and have affected native biota in virtually everyecosystem type on earth. They are a major threat on aglobal scale and addressing IAS is of major significanceto biodiversity and sustainable livelihood outcomes. Forthis reason, ISSG advocates for special attention to IASmanagement but also for consistent mainstreaming of IASissues into activities that aim to stem the loss ofbiodiversity and ecosystem services or aim to supportsustainable livelihoods.

Some of the highlights of ISSG’s achievements in thelast four years include:

(1) Assisting IUCN and IUCN Members or Partners

• ISSG on behalf of IUCN HQ, organised the IUCNscoping workshop (May 2002), in which representa-tives from Programmes, Regional and National IUCNoffices and external advisors confirmed the signifi-cance of Invasive Alien Species issues for IUCN’swork, and planned for IUCN’s further involvement.

• Preparation of material for and/or participation inIUCN delegation for CBD meetings (SBSTTA5,SBSTTA6, COP6, COP7)

• Co-organising Workshop on IAS as part of the “Man-agement Effectiveness Stream” at the World ParksCongress (Durban, September 2003) which resultedin the recognition of IAS management needs as an“emerging issue”

• Facilitating IAS component in Global BiodiversityForum on environment and trade, (September 2003,Cancun, Mexico) ; Assistance to IUCN briefing docu-ment on IAS and Trade for CBD-COP7.

• Assisting with inclusion of IAS issues into IUCN’sWorld Heritage Convention work, including feasi-bility study on IAS management on Cocos Island(Costa Rica) and Missions to other WH sites likeDjouj (Mauritania, Senegal), Galapagos (Ecuador).

• Close cooperation with IUCN Marine Programme,Biodiversity Policy Programme, Environmental lawCentre, Regional Offices in Meso-America, EastAfrica and Mediterranean, Japan’s Biodiversity Net-

works and many others within the IUCN family.• Contributing to Council of Europe IAS strategy

(adopted at December 2003)• Planning for IAS component at World Summit on

Sustainable Resources (S. Africa Sept 2002), withNew Zealand delegation

• Assisting and contributing to the Global InvasiveSpecies Programme (GISP)

(2) Publications• Turning the Tide: The Eradication of Invasive Spe-

cies, Proceedings of the International Conference onEradication of Island Invasives (2002)

• 100 of the World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species(2000)

• Aliens : bi-annual newsletter• Aliens-L: a listserver dedicated to invasive alien

species that threaten biodiversity which allows usersto freely seek and share information

(3) The Global Invasive Species Database

The Global Invasive Species Database (GISD) provides abroad audience with easy access to authoritative informa-tion on IAS. It disseminates globally sourced informa-tion, including good practice, case studies, specialist’s

BOX1: Global Invasive Species Database

A big thank you goes out to all the expertswho have contributed information or reviewedprofiles for the GISD, and to supporters andpartner organisations who have helped makethe project a success. I would also like to takethis opportunity to introduce Shyama Pagad.Shyama has been processing most of the in-formation going into the GISD for the pastyear and is largely responsible for the rapidprogress. Originally from Bangalore, she hasa background in horticulture, sustainable de-velopment and GIS. Finally, I would like tocollect some information on who is using theGISD and what they are using it for. Pleasetell me what you know by emailing me atm.browne@auckland.ac.nz

Michael Browne,Manager, Global Invasive Species Databasehttp://www.issg.org/databaseISSGEmail: m.browne@auckland.ac.nz

Eradicate cane toads (Bufo marinus) andprevent their re-colonisation on V iwa Island,Fiji

Cane toads were initially brought into Fiji to combatthe sugar cane beetle problem in the 1930s but havehad a significant negative environmental impact. Theproposal to eradicate cane toads (and invasive mam-mals) from Viwa Island (0.6km2), near Suva, has beendetermined to be a high priority. This is mainly toprotect the critically endangered Fijian ground frog(Platymantis vitianus).

The anticipated outcomes for this potential demon-stration project are the eradication of cane toads, arecovery of Fijian ground frog numbers, and the pro-tection of a number of birds. There should also be sig-nificant socio-economic benefits such as an improvedwater supply (artesian wells), enhanced crop yields,and more land-use options – including nature tour-ism.

This project is supported by the residents of the soleViwa village and has academic support from the Uni-versity of the South Pacific (USP) and other institu-tions (Griffith University, DOC). A feasibility studyhas been undertaken that concluded that eradicationis achievable if executed over a sustained period –though techniques will need to be developed. Thisproject aims to involve local community members asvolunteers, as well as student researchers from USP.

Eradication of cane toads has not been accomplishedbefore. Therefore, this would be a world “first” withsignificant implications for managing tropical islandselsewhere where cane toads have invaded or may in-vade. This project would provide important potentialsocial and economic benefits as well as biodiversityones. Important new approaches and techniques withpotential global applications could also be developed.

Mont Panié multi-species control programme,New Caledonia

The Mt Panié region in New Caledonia is a global‘hotspot’ - 75% of plants found here are found no-where else on earth. However, in this region invasivemammals have a number of negative effects; pigscause significant impacts on subsistence food produc-tion and rats disrupt natural forest regeneration pro-cesses. Rats and cats have been also implicated in thedecline of vulnerable New Caledonian wildlife.

The potential aims of this demonstration project areto control multiple species within a designated areain the Mt Panié reserve and develop long-term ca-pacity amongst the local community to undertake in-vasive species control. This project will build sup-port and capacity to effectively control invasive mam-mals and develop control and monitoring skillsamongst local operators. The focus of this project ison control, rather than eradication.

This project is supported by Conservation Interna-tional, Maruia Trust, Nouvelle Caledonie and Prov-ince Nord Government. A preliminary assessment atMt Panié (conducted by the ISSG and DOC) suggestsapproaches used to control invasive species in NewZealand are likely to be transferable to New Caledonia.

Chris DennyCooperative Initiative on Invasive Alien Species onIslands (CII)Email: c.denny@auckland.ac.nz

Photo: Lindsay WilsonFijian ground frog . Photo: Claire Morrison

Box 2: Cooperative Initiative on IAS on Islands (CII) - examples

knowledge and experience. The database has a dual aim: to raise awareness about invasive alien species, their im-pacts, and the opportunities to fight back; and to be a management tool assisting decision makers, practitioners andcommunities to address their IAS problems. The database has undergone a series of enhancements thanks in part toa Memorandum of Cooperation that ISSG and the US National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII) signedearly in 2002. Now the GISD contains profiles of more than 250 species that threaten biodiversity, ranging frommicro-organisms to plants and animals. Future plans include ongoing population of the database with more profilesand development of a CD-ROM version of the database for those who have poor, or no access to the Internet, -bridging the digital divide. We are also developing a global master list of invasive species (focussing on biodiversityimpacts), which will assist with early warning and prevention. In addition, we are cooperating with Island Conser-vation and Ecology Group (Santa Cruz, USA) in the development of an Eradications Register to increase the ex-change and sharing of practical expertise. In addition, the GISD will become a key contributor to the new GlobalInvasive Species Information Network which is under development.The GISD project has been remarkably successful thanks to the voluntary work of invasive species specialists from allover the world who either create or review the information it contains. [http://www.issg.org/database].

(4) Cooperative Initiative on Invasive Alien Species on Islands.

The ISSG is hosting and coordinating the Cooperative Initiative on Invasive Alien Species on Islands (CII). The aimof the CII is to facilitate cooperation and build capacity to manage IAS on islands. This initiative followed from callsfrom Small Island Developing States and was developed (under the umbrella of GISP) as a joint initiative involvingthe New Zealand Government and the Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) / IUCN. It was launched in April2002 at CBD-COP 6 and activities started in June 2002 with seed funding from the New Zealand Agency for Interna-tional Development (NZAID) and the Pacific Development and Conservation Trust (New Zealand).

Achievements include:

• Facilitated the development of the Pacific Ant Prevention Plan (PAPP) and coordinating further efforts, resultingin endorsement by the Pacific Island Countries and Territories in March 2004. Jointly with the Secretariat for thePacific Community (SPC) Secretariat for the Pacific Environment Programme (SPREP) and the Pacific InvasiveAnt Group, we are now actively seeking to secure funds for a fulltime coordinator (to be based at SPC).

• Development and design of two courses in IAS management (SPREP Pacific Invasive Species Prevention Courseand a Generic Course in IAS Management for GISP).

• Development of 3 publications on IAS for GISP (Best Practice Manuals for Prevention and for Early Detection/Rapid Response, Toolkit for Managing IAS on Islands).

• Facilitated the following feasibility studies:o Feasibility of Eradication of cane toads and rats from Viwa Island (Fiji) to alleviate threats the endangered

Fijian ground frog (Platymantis vitianus).o Feasibility of Eradication of a suite of invasive mammals and weeds for biodiversity gains on Cocos Island,

Costa Rica.o Feasibility of Control of a suite of invasive mammals on Mont Panié, New Caledonia.

• Developed the Pacific Programme of the CII, with the New Zealand Agency for International Development(NZAID) into a WSSD Type II partnership, with NZAID providing 3 year funding for coordination.

Prof Mick Clout, Chair ISSGEmail: issg@auckland.ac.nzwww.issg.org

ISSG MEMBERS HELP PLAN A PROGRAMME TO COMBAT ALIEN INVASIONS INTHE CAPE FLORAL KINGDOM OF SOUTH AFRICA

As a small (c90000 km²) isolated areaof Mediterranean-type climate at thesouthernmost tip of a predominantlytropical/subtropical, predominantlysummer-rainfall continent, the CapeFloral Kingdom (CFK) exhibits manyof the characteristics of an isolatedoceanic island. One such character-istic is a heightened susceptibility toinvasion by introduced organisms.The significance of alien plant inva-sions has been recognised by CFKland managers for over half a century,and these invasions have been rela-tively well-researched and extensivecontrol programmes have been imple-mented. However, it is doubtfulwhether, at least until very recently,the tide of alien invasions of the CFKhad been successfully turned.

Accordingly, when an application tothe Global Environment Facility wasrecently being put together for finan-cial assistance to help South Africaconserve this biodiversity hotspot, itsoon emerged that the problem ofalien invasions was one of the cross-cutting issues affecting all the differ-ent environments of the CFK. As a

result the final C.A.P.E. (Cape Actionfor People and the Environment)Programme that was recently ap-proved for funding by the GEF in-cluded a specific component on thecontrol of Invasive Alien Species(IAS). C.A.P.E. has been approved bythe GEF as a 15 to 20 year-longprogramme with only the first five-year Phase 1 having so far been de-tailed and funded.

Phase 1 of the CAPE component onIAS has three distinct subcompo-nents: the first is the formulation ofthe first-ever comprehensive strategicplan and business plan for the pre-vention and management of IAS overthe entire CFK (this will involve in-ventory, mapping and prioritizationexercises over all taxa and all ecosys-tem types and the rationalization ofinstitutional arrangements for themanagement of IAS within the CFK),the second is the creation of two Cen-tres-of-Excellence for research andtraining in IAS management in theCFK (the one in the Western Capewill focus on terrestrial invasionswhile that in the Eastern Cape will

focus on aquatic invasions), while thethird is a pilot programme on the re-habilitation of the endemic and highlythreatened fauna of the CFK’s fresh-water ecosystems through the removalof alien predatory fish species.

A number of ISSG members playedimportant roles in the development ofthis CAPE Programme: Dr Ian AWMacdonald was the lead consultantfor the IAS component, and was aidedin this exercise by Dr Guy Preston andProfessor Dave Richardson. A largenumber of non-ISSG members werealso involved in this planning exer-cise, in particular Dr Christo Maraison catchment management aspects,Drs John Hoffmann and Alan Woodon biocontrol aspects, and Dr KasHamman and Dean Impson on alienfish invasions as well as Dr PatHolmes.

Ian A. W. MacdonaldInternational EnvironmentalConsultantDie BoordSouth AfricaEmail: macdonfam@kingsley.co.za

Italy and Invasive Aquatic S pecies – short account on ongoing activities

Italy is at a crossroads in the Mediterranean, between the establishment of species that come through maritime trafficand aquaculture, the expansion of others that have been introduced through the Suez Canal and of those that arenaturally expanding their range through Gibraltar, also as a consequence of climatic change. This resulted in a largenumber of alien species along the Italian coasts (148 species, last estimate July 2004) and the development of true bio-invasions, including the two Caulerpa species, other algae and molluscs, such as Rapana venosa, or crustaceans, suchas the decapod Percnon gibbesi, that is actively colonising the western coasts of Italy.

Pioneer efforts by the NGO Italian Marine Biology Society, that has gathered a group of experts, have been backed bythe Ministry of Environment that has funded a project to ICRAM (Central Institute of Marine Research). The aims of thenearly completed project are: knowledge on alien species recorded in Mediterranean Sea, including information sheets,GIS data bank, check lists, genetic information; training of specialists; pilot surveys and ballast water studies in ports.International links, e.g. through the appropriate working groups of ICES (International Council for the Exploration of theSea) that have met in Cesenatico, Italy in March 2004, the CIESM (International Commission for the Exploration of theMediterranean Sea) and EMBS (European Marine Biology Symposium) are established in order to coordinate nationalactivities.

Communicated by Anna Occhipinti-AmbrogiUniversity of PaviaEmail: occhipin@unipv.it

“European Strategy on Invasive Alien Species”:toward a regional approach for halting the biodiversity loss caused by invasive

alien species.

In the last years, the European Section of ISSG has fo-cused its activity on the production of the “European Strat-egy on Invasive Alien Species”, that was finally adoptedlast December by the Standing Committee of the Bern con-vention, a forum convening 45 European states and theEuropean commission.

The development of this document has required many tech-nical workshops, meetings with experts from all Europeancountries, inputs from non-governmental organizations,governments and scientists, and a complex work of coor-dination of many contributions.

The final result of these efforts is a technical document -describing actions that shall be taken by governments andstakeholders – but with a clear political and legal power,since the Convention on Biological Diversity has formallyacknowledged the European Strategy as a tool to imple-ments the guiding principles on invasive alien species atthe European level, and the recommendation n. 99 (2003)adopted by the Bern convention calls European states toimplement the provisions of the document.

The implementation of the European strategy will indeedconcur to the more general aim of halting the loss ofbiodiversity in Europe in the next decade. But for this aim,it is now critical to assist European states to develop andimplement national action plans on invasive alien species,and to promote cooperation among states, scientists andstakeholders on this topic.

For the next future, priority for work of ISSG Europe is thusto promote these processes. An assessment of what statesare doing has already started, coordinated by GEI Spain, inorder to better identify priorities and options for futurework.

To achieve this goal, ISSG Europe will continue its effortsto network European experts, to assist governments in theirwork on the issue, to cooperate with the European institu-tions and to support and promote conferences and techni-cal meetings focusing on biological invasions.

Piero GenovesiChair European Section IUCN SSC ISSGEmail: infspapk@iperbole.bologna.it

Ten years of the regional Baltic research network on Alien S pecies

The Baltic Sea is known to host more than 100 aquaticalien species. This human mediated addition to the Balticflora and fauna is being registered in the Baltic Sea AlienSpecies Database (http://www.ku.lt/nemo/mainnemo.htm).The database is one of the outcomes of the Baltic MarineBiologists (BMB) Working Group on Non-indigenous Es-tuarine and Marine Organisms (NEMO) in the Baltic Sea.In 1994, the BMB decided to establish a new working groupto promote studies on alien species in the Baltic Sea. BMBis a non-governmental academic organisation founded inthe late 1960s and uniting most of the scholars working inthe field of marine biology and ecology in Baltic Sea Area.Establishment of the WG NEMO by this well recognisedscientific body became a remarkable event, indicating agrowing research interest to the problem of invasive spe-cies. One of the key aims of the WG NEMO was to collectand summarise information on non-indigenous aquaticplants and animals in the Baltic Sea and make it availableonline for international readers. Since 1997, the Databaseaccumulates information on taxonomy, biology, vector andtime of introduction, area of origin as well as ecologicaland economic impacts of alien species.

The BMB WG NEMO organized two advanced MSc andPhD courses on Marine Bioinvasions which attractedyoung researchers’ attention to various aspects of inva-

sion biology. Members of the WG also took part in severaljoint projects, e.g.: “Initial Risk Assessment of Alien Spe-cies in Nordic Coastal Waters”, sponsored by the NordicCouncil of Ministers and the EU funded Concerted Action” Ballast Testing Monitoring Systems for Risk Assess-ment of Harmful Introductions by Ships”. In 2001, thefounders of the group, Erkki Leppäkoski (Ãbo AkademiUniversity, Finland) and Sergej Olenin (Klaipeda Univer-sity, Lithuania) together with the present convener of theBMB WG NEMO, Stephan Gollasch (GoConsult Ltd., Ham-burg, Germany) initiated and later edited a book “Invasiveaquatic species of Europe - distribution, impact and man-agement” (Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002).

At present the BMB WG NEMO comprises about 30 re-searchers working on functional ecology, risk assessment,ecophysiology and other aspects of invasion biology inthe Baltic Sea.

Prof. Dr. Sergej Olenin,Chief Scientist Coastal Research and PlanningInstitute, Klaipeda UniversityLithuaniahttp://www.corpi.ku.lt/Email: serg@gmf.ku.lt

Why did the beetle cross the sea?The Search for Invasives in the British Virgin Islands

I have been working in the British Virgin Is-lands (BVI) since 1993. Like much of the Car-ibbean, there are many invasive species inthe BVI, and a number of them are very dam-aging. Various islands are troubled by mon-goose (Herpestes auropunctatus), goats,sheep, coralita (Antigonon leptopus), andother invaders. With funding from theFalconwood Foundation, most of my time inthe BVI is spent on Guana Island. This is aremarkably diverse private reserve: more spe-cies are known from it than from any islandof comparable size. Although it wasn’tinvasives that originally brought me here, Isoon became concerned with several spe-cies. Most of the work on these issues isconducted with the help of Dr. Skip Lazell(The Conservation Agency) and ClivePetrovic (H. Lavity Stoutt Community Col-lege). A few years ago we noticed that thecentury plants (Agave missionum) on Guanawere dying. Searching for the cause, our col-leagues Barry and Buena Valentine (OhioState University) discovered that a new spe-cies of beetle, the agave weevil(Scyphophorus acupunctatus), has recentlyarrived. Unlike in its native range, where itonly attacks senescent plants, in the BVIthe beetle attacks pre-flowering adults andeven juveniles.

Since then, our main objective has been todocument the impact of the beetle. Repeatedsurveys of multiple islands show that theinvasion is still ongoing, and that at theheight of the irruption, over 90% of theagave population may be dead or dying.Those that remain are primarily the juveniles,which may then be attacked as they grow.We are also trying to ascertain the methodof spread and identify potential means oflimiting additional range extensions, but bothtargets have proven hard to achieve.

Some other issues we’ve been looking atrecently primarily involve reptiles and am-phibians. We have now documented thespread of corn snakes (Elaphe guttata)in the US Virgin Islands and on Curaçao,and expect them to spread further in theCaribbean in the near future. A few yearsago, we identified a population of red-eared sliders (Trachemys scripta) onTortola, and earlier this year have foundat least one other freshwater turtle (ten-tatively identified as T. stejnegeri) at thesame site. Finally, Jennifer Owen is fin-ishing a Master’s project with me, study-ing the spread and ecology of the Cubantreefrog (Osteopilus sepetentrionalis) inthe BVI. Unfortunately, we have beenable to identify several new island infes-tations and have evidence that they havea negative impact on native wildlife, andespecially native frogs.

CAB International recently summarizedCaribbean invasive species issues for theNature Conservancy. They cataloguedsome 550 invasive species from the re-gion (available at http://www.issg.org/da-tabase /spec ies / re fe rence_ f i l es /Kairo%20et%20al,%202003.pdf), yet anumber of the species and every singleone of the populations mentioned abovewere not included. This illustrates themagnitude of the problem in the Carib-bean: there are many islands, spread overa large area, governed by dozens of re-gimes and speaking multiple languages.Invasive species have not been a majorconcern for many of them, and the resultis a multitude of poorly-documented andmostly un-addressed invasions.

Gad PerryDept. of Range, Wildlife and FisheriesManagement, Texas Tech University, USAEmail:gad.perry@ttu.edu

CONNECTIONS WITH HOME

I have been in Japan for just on two months now and I am really enjoying getting toknow the native plants and animals. In the native forests, everything is so differentfrom home (New Zealand). Mostly, in this part of Japan, the forests are deciduous anddominated by beech (Fagus spp.) and oaks (Quercus spp.). Many plants are veryfamiliar, such as the dog-tooth violets (Erythronium japonicum) and other violets(Viola spp.) which are among the first to come up once the snow has melted. Alsorhododendrons and magnolias are common understorey plants and, along the forestedge, Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) is abundant in places. These aresome of the connections with home, but for us, in New Zealand, these are all intro-duced plants that are mostly in gardens.

However, a real connection with home is the row of cabbage trees (Cordyline austra-lis) outside the building that I work in at Utsunomiya University. These trees have justfinished flowering and I enjoyed the characteristic perfume whenever I left the build-ing during the past couple of weeks. I have seen a couple more cabbage trees outsidea brick building further down the road, and when I passed through Kumagaya aboutthree weeks ago I was delighted to see a small group of cabbage trees outside a largebuilding on the main street. Somehow, I felt a lot closer to home because these familiarplants, so reminiscent of New Zealand, were right outside the door. The cabbage treeis endemic to New Zealand, i.e., it doesn’t occur naturally in any other country.

But should I get so excited to see a tree from home? Is this what drove the Europeansettlers to import so many plants from Europe? There was the obvious need to providefood especially since not a lot of native plants are very edible (also, persons of Britishextraction tend to be very conservative in their food tastes!). But there was also thesentimental attachment to “things from home” that were familiar and comforting. That’swhy the number of introduced plants in New Zealand exceeds the native flora by tentimes! The number of plant species introduced to New Zealand is around 24,700whereas the native flora numbers just over 2,500.

Unfortunately, it is this movement of plant (and other) species between countries thatleads to the eventual decline of biodiversity worldwide. We all know the effect that oldman’s beard (Clematis vitalba - introduced from Europe) can have on our nativeforest remnants, and some New Zealand plants are causing the loss of native vegeta-tion in other countries, e.g., NZ flax (Phormium tenax) on the Isle of St Helena andpohutukawa (Metrosideros excelsa) near Capetown, South Africa. Native plants shouldremain in their own countries. If these cabbage trees in Utsunomiya were showing anysigns of spreading, I would recommend to the gardeners that they kill them. Fortu-nately, they are not spreading (unlike the Chinese fan palm (Trachycarpus fortunei),introduced from China, which is an invasive plant in Japan as well as New Zealand!).

However, I have learnt a valuable lesson. I should be staunch when I go overseas andnot get excited at the sight of a NZ endemic plant. I should drink in the local sights andsounds and not get sentimental about connections with home!

This article was written in June 2004.

Carol J. West is Visiting Professor at the Center for Research on Wild Plants,Utsunomiya University,, JapanCarol will return to Southland Conservancy, Department of Conservation, NewZealand at the end of March 2005.Email: west@crwp.mine.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp

Invasive alien plants in Germany:Results of a national survey and conservation activities on the federal level

Invasive alien species (IAS) are considered to be thesecond largest reason for biodiversity loss on a worldwidescale and is reflected in recent international conventionsand policies. Nevertheless, in Central Europe IAS areconsidered to be of lower ecological risk compared to otherregions. Of the 3383 established species of higher plantsin Germany, 228 are non-indigenous species that havebeen introduced with traditional land use practises before1492 (archaeophyte plants) and 363 are so called neophyteplants (introduction after 1492). Another 625 neophyteplant species are at least locally established or occuroccasionally. While ¼ of the archaeophyte plants areendangered, about 30 of the around 1000 neophyte plantspecies are considered to have negative impacts on nativebiodiversity (invasive alien plants).

Referring to this a survey of interviews with 360 regionaland local conservation authorities in Germany in 2003demonstrates that 96% of the agencies do have “problemswith neophyte plants”, whereas 57 species are mentionedall together. But only four species/groups present over 50%of all reported cases (Heracleum mategazzianum,Impatiens glandulifera, Fallopia spec., Solidago gigantea& S. canadensis). There are only a few variations in thespecies mentioned. Prunus serotina and Rosa rugosa areespecially mentioned in the North of Germany, Robiniapseudoacacia and Acer negando in the East. In 39% ofall cases (n=1908) control measures have been taken,whereas only 23% of these are regarded to be “successful”.The calculated costs for those cases where informationon the expenses were given (n=214) add up to at least 1,5Mio. Euro/a.

On the German federal level there are three ongoing andintended projects related to IAS:

1. Web based handbook of invasive alien plant speciesNeoFlora (www.neophyten.de/ ) offering also aplatform for information networking withconservation authorities and volunteers,

2. Development of a Certification System for native seedstock of known local proveniences,

3. National Strategy on invasive alien species, buildingup a possible institutional and legal framework forall stakeholders involved in the introduction of and/or affected by invasive alien species.

Together with Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia,Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Russian Federation andSweden, Germany is part in the initiative Nordic-BalticNetwork on Invasive Species (NOBANIS)(www.skovognatur.dk/nobanis ). NOBANIS will be agateway to information on alien and invasive species inthe Nordic and Baltic Region. The project is supportedby the Nordic Council of Ministers (www.norden.org/ ).

Literatur e:Hubo, C., Jumpertz, E., Nockemann, L., 2004: Entwicklung dernationalen Strategie gegen invasive gebietsfremde Arten. In:Szyska, B. (Ed.): Neophyten - Ergebnisse einesErfahrungsaustausches zur Vernetzung von Bund, Ländern undKreisen. BfN-Skripten 108, p. 43-53.Schepker, H., 2004. Problematische Neophyten in Deutschland– Ergebnisse einer bundesweiten Befragung vonNaturschutzbehörden. In: Szyska, B. (Ed.): Neophyten - Ergebnisseeines Erfahrungsaustausches zur Vernetzung von Bund, Ländernund Kreisen. BfN-Skripten 108, p. 55-84.Umweltbundesamt (Ed.) 2003: Economic Impact of the Spreadof alien Species in Germany. TEXTE 80/03. 229 pp.Umweltbundesamt (Ed.) 2001: Fallstudien zu gebietsfremdenArten in Deutschland. – Case Studies on Alien Species in Ger-many. Text in German and English. TEXTE 13/01. 126 pp.Umweltbundesamt (Ed.) 1999: Alien Organisms in Germany:Documentation of a Conference on 5 and 6 March, 1998 ‘LegalRegulations Concerning Alien Organisms in Comparison toGenetically Modified Organisms’. TEXTE 18/99. 142 pp.

For further information:

Frank KlingensteinDr. Hartwig SchepkerFederal Agency for Nature ConservationHorticulture, Conservation & Plant EcologyGermanyEmail: frank.klingenstein@bfn.de postbox@hartwig-schepker.de

Dr. Ulrike DoyleEmail: ulrike.doyle@uba.de

CIESM AND BIOINVASIONS IN THE MEDITERRANEAN SEA

Alien macrophytes, invertebrates and fish are found inmost coastal habitats in the Mediterranean Sea. Someinvasive species have out-competed or replaced nativespecies locally, some are considered pests or causenuisance, whereas other invaders are of commercial value.The rate of marine bioinvasions has increased in recentdecades; collectively they have significant ecological andeconomic impacts in the Mediterranean. Most of the alienspecies are thermophilic, originating in the tropical Indo-Pacific or tropical Atlantic and, should global warmingaffect Mediterranean sea-water temperature, thenthermophilic invasive species would gain a distinctadvantage over the native biota.

The principal vectors of introduction are, in descendingorder of importance, passage through the Suez Canal,maricultur e and shipping.

The advent and spread of alien species in the Mediterra-nean Sea were repeatedly discussed in the Commissioninternationale pour l’exploration scientifique de la merMéditerranée (CIESM) forums over the past three de-cades, and it was widely perceived that the littoral andinfralittoral biota of the sea is undergoing a rapid andprofound change.The genesis of the three volumes of the CIESM Atlas ofExotic Species in the Mediterranean, dealing with fish,crustaceans and molluscs, began with an Editorial Panelthat provided the conceptual basis for the initiative andinvited the authors of each volume. The authors assembledand authenticated the extant knowledge of the scale andimpact of aliens taxa in the Mediterranean, drawing onmyriad sources. The primary sources include researchpapers, biota surveys, ecological studies, and fisheriesmanagement reports. These records were supplementedand amended by personal communications with scien-tists of particular taxonomic expertise. The preliminarylists were posted on the CIESM website (www.ciesm.org/atlas/) and comments were solicited from the wider marinescientific community. After integrating the additional ma-terial, the volumes were published. The website itselfis updated on an annual basis.

Introductions brought about by shipping were the focusof a multidisciplinary CIESM workshop held in 2002 thatexamined the extant knowledge of the scale and impactof ship-transported aliens in the Mediterranean and Blacksea region (CIESM workshop monographs, 20). The rec-ommendations that emerged from the workshop calledfor implementing a Mediterranean-wide program of portand port-proximate surveys using standardized protocolsto identify alien species and organisms that pose signifi-cant risk to human health that might be disseminated byshipping from the region. Late last year CIESM launchedthe first basin-wide port-survey program PORTAL - PORT

surveys in the Mediterranean Sea for ship-transportedAlien organisms, scientists to participate in the first ba-sin-wide port-survey program. To date, 10 participatingports – from Izmir to Barcelona, Livorno to Valetta - havebeen sampled.

B.S. GalilNational Institute of Oceanography,Israel Oceanographic & Limnological Research, POB8030, Haifa 31080, IsraelEmail: galil@post.tau.ac.il

Slovakia and Invasive Alien Species

Slovakia, like many other countries all over the world, facesthe problem with invasive alien species which invade notonly human-made ecosystems but penetrate intoseminatural and natural ecosystems and also threatenprotected areas.

The Ministry of the Environment and the State NatureConservancy of the Slovak Republic, in particular, havebeen systematically dealing with the problem since 1997.First of all it started with the mapping of invasive alienspecies distribution and later, based on results of themapping, with eradication and control of major species ofconcern. However, most of the work has been done inrelation to invasive alien plant species so far. In 2002 a Listof Alien, Invasive Alien and Expansive Native VascularPlant Species of Slovakia (second draft) was published.According to the list 47 taxa are considered to be invasiveat the national level and 49 at the regional level. Increasedattention as regards mapping and management is beingpaid to these particular plant species and about 3000 sitesof 50 species have been recorded so far. Practicalmanagement (mostly eradication and control) isconcentrated in protected areas. Good results are forinstance with control of giant hogweed (Heracleummantegazzianum) in the National Park Nízke Tatry (LowTatras) and in the Protected Landscape Area Kysuce. Jointeffort to contain/control population of giant hogweedspreading along the Dunajec river in Pieniny National Parkboth in Poland and Slovakia is a good example of bilateralco-operation in transboundary regions. Areas, where nospecial protection is provided but invasive alien specieshave been recorded there, are also subject to managementmeasures. Every year nature conservation bodies take careof approximately 120 localities. As for the other sectors,water management authorities contribute to elimination of

invasive alienplant species inconnection withregular manage-ment of watercourses.

Within last two orthree years thework on theproblems causedby invasive alienanimal specieshas intensified.First drafts oflists of invasivespecies of fish,mammals havebeen not onlyprepared but alsoevaluation of

spread of alien fish species and their impact on nativespecies has been done in selected water courses inProtected Landscape Areas of Latorica, Dunajské luhyand Záhorie in Southern Slovakia.

Legislation and invasive alien species

First efforts to tackle the issue of invasive alien species inthe national legislation brought the result and the Law onNature and Landscape Protection approved in 1994 dealtwith the problem of alien species. However, its regulationsappeared as not very sufficient. The amendment of theLaw in 2002 should significantly help to solve the problemof invasive alien species. Some of its regulations alsoprovide protection for ecosystems composed of naturalspecies, including:

- regulation of intentional dissemination of alienspecies;

- monitoring of occurrence, population size andspread of alien species;

- elimination of invasive alien species.The law also deals with trade in invasive alien species andobliges owners (administrators, tenants) to eliminateinvasive alien species from their land. However, in everydaylife law enforcement conflicts with many other problemssuch as unclear and disputed land ownership, and so thestate has to bear the main burden of alien specieselimination now. According to the order of the Ministry ofthe Environment obligation to eliminate invasive alienspecies applies only to the seven most problematic plantspecies: Fallopia japonica, Fallopia × bohemica,Fallopia sachalinensis, Heracleum mantegazzianum,Impatiens glangulifera, Solidago canadensis, andSolidago gigantea.

Enforcing the law – building awareness and support

Law and its enforcement is one side of the coin, the otheris how society understands, accepts and supports it. Butsociety often has limited understanding of the range ofthreats posed by invasive alien species. Buildingawareness and public support is very important part of thestruggle with invasive alien species. The State NatureConservancy is also developing many activities in thisfield, for example contributions to local, regional, andnational mass-media: newspapers, magazines, radio andTV broadcasting, brochures, leaflets, educationalprogrammes for schools. Printed materials such as a seriesof five leaflets Invasive Alien Plant Species in Slovakia orGuideline for Elimination of Selected Invasive Plant Speciesare being distributed to target groups both formally andinformally on various occasions with an offer of technicalsupport.

All above-mentioned activities concerning invasive alienspecies are just the first steps towards solving the problemsAdapted from Photo by R. Wittenberg

posed. A pile of work is still waiting for Slovakia, forinstance, development of more active policy aimed atprevention of new invasions, mitigation of impacts, andmost of all shared responsibilities with other sectors insociety: governmental and non-governmentalorganisations as well as general public or development ofmore active co-operation with neighbouring countries, etc.

The State Nature Conservancy believes that goodcommunication with all the relevant stakeholders andbuilding partnership, that it tries to apply, is one of thekeys to the success.

Alien species on Cyprus

Cyprus is an island of oceanic origin which has never been connected to the mainland. Because of this isolation, andsome other reasons, it developed a unique biodiversity. Cyprus is considered a biodiversity “hotspot” area and is theonly center for endemism for birds in Europe and the Middle East. In addition there is a center of endemism formammals, with six out of its 11 wild mammals being endemic, and a center of plant diversity. During the lastdecades a large number of alien invasive species were introduced on the island. I have been working with theidentification of these species, trying to provide the appropriate information to the local authorities on how to deal orto prevent the spreading or the importation of additional invasive species, and in some cases with their eradication.

The major problems from alien invasive species arose from the importation of 17 species of fresh water fish, whichbrought near extinction the endemic grass snake (Natrix natrix cypriaca). In addition the introduction of wild boar(Sus scrofa) in 1996 in the Troodos National Forest Park is threatening a unique habitat with rich biodiversity. TheTroodos National Forest Park, an area of 9 337 hectares, has the highest biodiversity in Cyprus and the highestnumber of endemic species on the island. Of the 139 endemic plants of Cyprus, 72 are found in the park, and 16 ofthem are local endemic. Because of this, wild boar has the potential to cause considerable, maybe irreversible,damage to the local fauna and flora.

Another environmental threat is the spreading of the alien plant species Acacia saligna (Labill.) Wendl. fil. This is themost serious invasive plant species on Cyprus, threatening many natural habitats. It invades forests, maquis, garigue,phrygana, and marshy areas. Furthermore it invades agricultural land becoming a serious weed. The most serious threatwas observed at Limassol Salt Lake where it replaces the reeds and other halophytes of the marshy zone. Anotherinvasive species is Robinia pseudoacacia L., which is spreading in forests, maquis, garigue and phrygana vegetationsimilarly to Acacia saligna, but to a lesser extent.

In addition to the above species, the following adventive species are spreading in natural habitats, namely: Celtisaustralis L., Cercis siliquastrum L., Prunus dulcis (Mill.) D.A.Webb, Ailantus altissimma (Mill.) Swingle and Casua-rina cunninghamiana Miq. The latter is spreading mainly in the marshy zone of Limassol Salt Lake. Furthermore, threespecies were recently recorded for the first time as adventive to Cyprus that spread in natural habitats: Fraxinusangustifolia Vahl, Pyrus malus L., Prunus persica (L.) Batasch. Eleftherios HadjisterkotisMinistry of the Interior, Nicosia, CyprusEmail: hjsterkotis@cytanet.com.cy

Editorial Note: The next issue of Aliens will have a more in depth article on alien fish in Cyprus.

Ema Gojdièová,State Nature Conservancy of the Slovak Republic,Regional Office for Nature and Landscape Conservation,Hlavná 93, 080 01 Prešov,Slovakiaegojdic@sopsr.sk

Al•beta Cvachová,State Nature Conservancy of the Slovak Republic,Centre for Nature and Landscape Conservation,Lazovná 10, 974 01 Banská Bystrica,Slovakiacvachova@sopsr.sk

AQUATIC ALIEN SPECIES IN IRELAND

Ireland as an environmentIreland lies in a cool temperate regionstrongly influenced by the warm NorthAtlantic drift. The predominant pre-vailing winds from the south-west en-sure a year round, although variable,rainfall and the heat releases from thesea result in active air circulation.Water temperatures within the 3,500lakes seldom fall below 3ºC or riseabove 23ºC and have continuous drain-age flowing to all coasts. As the cen-tral plain is principally made from soilsoverlying limestones much of the wa-ter flow is alkaline. Marginal hillranges of sandstones, metamorphicand igneous rock and water drainingfrom once extensive bogs result in re-gional acid water releases.

The estuarine regions are generallysmall and drain directly to the sea viasheltered partly enclosed harbours(Cork Harbour), large estuaries (Shan-non), fjord (Killary Harbour) or rias(Bantry Bay) or have partly enclosedsheltered bays with little freshwater(Strangford Lough). Sea temperaturesare highly variable according to watercirculation and water depth but coasttemperatures range from 5-17ºC.

This landscape emerged from a gla-ciation of over 10,000 years ago and isan island on the fringe of Europewhere the biodiversity is less than onnearby Britain or the European conti-nent. The ice-sheet is thought to haveexcluded many species from entry. Forthis reason Ireland is still under suc-cessive colonisation and consists ofspecies that at some time would havearrived but have been introduced, tothe native and vagrant biota, exoticand cryptogenic species.

The introduced speciesIt is unclear whether the soft-shelledclam Mya arenaria arrived followingViking movements or whether it mayhave been a late re-expansion withinEurope. Nevertheless some early ex-amples of species introductions areknown. Monastic movements were re-sponsible for imports of several fishesand perhaps a crayfishAustropotamobius pallipes, to en-

hance their food supply. All fishes inIreland were either anadromous or cat-adromous till this time. The successof many of the introduced fishes hasresulted in their naturalisation andmodification of previous assemblages.Some of these fishes form importantrecreational fisheries. Most arecyrpinids and some such as the bream(Abramis abramis), the rudd(Scardinus erythropthalmus) and theroach (Rutilus rutilus) hybridise. Thepredatory pike (Esox lucius) is a widelydistributed predator. The majority ofintroductions appear to have occurredduring the 20th century. More recentlythe rainbow trout (Oncorhynchusmykiss) has been introduced, but withfew exceptions are maintained withstock from hatcheries. The zebra mus-sel Dreissena polymorpha is a recentarrival and still is expanding from itsinitial colonisation of the inland navi-gation to isolated alkaline lakes. In itswake exotic amphipods are spreading,some of these deliberately introducedat some past time as a food for fish.

Some localised populations ofinvasives occur in dock regions, la-goons and estuaries, these include thetubeworm Ficopomatus enigmaticus,the barnacle Balanus improvisus andthe tunicate Styela clava. Some spe-cies are used in aquaculture such asthe Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigasand the Pacific clam Venerupisphilippinarum that are cultivated overextensive local areas and supplied byhatcheries as these are seldom knownto recruit in Ireland. Two species ofabalone from Europe Haliotustuberculata and Japan Haliotus dis-cus-hannai are in cultivation. Onespecies of red alga accidentally intro-duced to Ireland Asparagopsis armatais cultivated for its chemical proper-ties.

The pathways and vectorsEarly movements were almost certainlydeliberate, being cared for, to aid theirsurvival, during their transit. With theincrease in sea traffic some species arelikely to have been introduced whosetrue origin remains uncertain, these in-clude some boring and fouling spe-

cies. The timber boring shipwormToredo navalis, a bivalve, was prob-ably abundant in ship ports at a timewhen timber was widely available.However, it has become less abundantperhaps due to less habitat, there be-ing fewer wooden structures in ports,and on account of the presence ofleaching organotins used in ship paintantifoulants. Nevertheless shippinghas almost certainly been implicatedin the introduction of the tunicateStyela clava, the barnacles Balanusimprovisus and Elminius modestus, thesnail Potamopyrgus antipodarum andcrustaceans Limnoria tripunctata andCorophium sextonae. Small craft arealso likely to have spread E. modestusand F. enigmaticus. Indeed the im-ports of used craft from Britain are thelikely mode of colonisation by D.polymorpha.

Aquaculture has been responsible forthe appearance of both useful andunwanted species such as the crusta-cean parasites of the gut and gills ofthe C. gigas (Mytilicola orientalaisand Myicola ostraea) that gained ac-cess to Ireland following a general lift-ing of restrictions with Europe in thetrade of Pacific oysters. The bloodsporozoan Bonamia ostreae of thenative oyster continues to spread inIreland to native oysters Ostrea edulis.Some benign species are also movedwith stock movements of oysters thatinclude the Chinamans hat shellCalyptraea chinensis.

Imports of living species such asaquarium and pond plants Azollafiliculoides and some Lemna speciesare now widespread in garden pondsand some have become released to thewild. Many other non-native speciesare on sale in garden centres. Withchanging conditions these could es-tablish themselves. Aquarium andpond fishes are likely to escape to thewild such as the sturgeons. Lobsterimports from North America ofHomarus americanus intended for di-rect consumption have been held inwalled sea ponds. The unauthorisedmovement in the 1960’s led to an out-break of gaffkaemia, a bacterial dis-

ease, that spread to native lobsterswithin the pond and all lobsters weredestroyed. The eel parasiteAnquillicola crassus may have beenintroduced to Ireland by trucks hold-ing live eel landings in tanks. Eels arecollected from fisheries over a widegeographical area that includes Britainand Ireland and in this way the parasitemay have spread.

Deliberate movements, restocking aswell as natural opportunities for spreadhave enabled the dace (Leuciscusleuciscus) to expand its range in thesouth and east of Ireland. The naturalspread of species, following combina-tions of drift dispersed by currents andwinds, have enabled the rapid spreadof the brown algae Colpomeniaperegraina and Sargassum muticumand the green alga Codium fragileatlanticum. The spread of the nakeddinoflagellate Gyrodinium aureolum,that causes caged fish kills, probablyspread from elsewhere in Europe withcurrent movements offshore.

ManagementManagement of exotic species contin-ues to evolve. In trade, codes of prac-tice have, and are, being developed totake account of accidental movements.Management of some species requiresa shared responsibility in the preven-tion of spread and the campaigns toinform the public are met with initial in-terest that is difficult to sustain. Inaquaculture any new species for culti-vation and management of current trad-ing practices are advised to follow theICES Code of Practice. This code hasbeen well tested and forms a reasonedbasis for deliberate movements of spe-cies. Management of unintentionaltransmission of species broadcast byshipping poses serious problems ascurrently the management of this issueworldwide has proceeded ahead of thescience and many novel means of con-trolling ballast water have yet to betested and intercalibrated. Further, oneof the main means of transmission isby ships’ hull fouling and species car-ried by hulls, that include mobile spe-cies, are often deduced as arriving inballast water. One of the main threatsis of the spread of microbiota and rest-ing stages of many taxa that may becarried both on hulls and within ballast

water. Until these issues are resolvedit may be expected that with the antici-pated increased trade in shipping, al-terations to climate and developmentin harbours as well as general improve-ments to water quality following theEuropean Union Water FrameworkDirective, that further non-native spe-cies will arrive. Some of these will beinvasive. Monitoring should takeplace in hubs areas where such spe-cies are likely to first arrive so that harm-ful species, when found, can be con-trolled at an early time. Species thatare not recognised early are unlikelyto be eliminated.

ReferencesICES 2003. ICES Code of Practice

on the Introductions and Transfersof Marine Organisms. www.ices.dk

Minchin, D. 2002. Exotics of coastaland inland waters of Ireland and Brit-ain. In:

Leppakoski, E., Gollasch, S. &Olenin, S. (eds) Invasive aquatic spe-cies of Europe. Distribution, impactsand management. Kluwer Academicpublishers, Dordrecht, 583pp.

Dan MinchinMOI, Marina Village, Ballina,Killaloe, IrelandEmail: minchin@indigo.iePhoto: D Minchin

ACTIONS AGAINST IAS:REPORT OF THE G.E.I. - GRUPO ESPECIES INVASORAS (SPAIN)

GEI, a national NGO, was created in 1998 to address theloss of biodiversity due to the introduction of IAS and topromote and develop initiatives and programmes devotedto the knowledge and conservation of biodiversity.

Despite increasing attention to the problem of biologicalinvasions from the international community and despiteisolated instances of alarm in Spain, an initial analysis ofthe situation revealed firstly a lack of awareness both at alocal and at a global level and secondly, the inadequacy ofthe existing legal and institutional framework. Strategiescarried out to face concrete biological threats were far frombeing integrated into a coherent management programmefor invading species (e.g., a campaign to control the Oxyurajamaicensis was developed in order to protect the Oxyuraleucocephala which was under threat). In fact, the reactionagainst other exotic species whose presence and invasivepotential was well known has been very slow (e.g. theMustela vison) or non existent (e.g. the Myocastor coypus).

IAS management strategies from different administrationshave been and still are contradictory. The implementationof mitigation or contention measures for IAS of huntingand fishing interest is very limited and is also conditionedby pressure groups. In some cases, this has led to thedesign of measures favouring invading species who havea known negative impact. Likewise, the custom to keepexotic pets and plants at home has increased which has ledto the presence in the wild of species such as the Trachemysscripta, Myopsitta monachus or Cortaderia selloana, hasnever been, save some recent exceptions, the objective ofeducation and awareness campaigns.

The GEI decided upon the development of a strategy gearedtowards raising awareness among the general public aboutthe problem of invading species. We have also aimed tocall the academic community and relevant institutions andorganisations to action.

ITINERANT EXHIBITION “ESPECIES INVASORAS DELA PENÍNSULA IBÉRICA”

Joining didactic communication and scientific rigour, theexhibition included a series of panels, games, models andan audio-visual. A booklet, a diptych and a school note-book complemented the programme. This exhibition con-tributed to:1. Increase the information about potential consequencesof the introduction of invading species as agents that af-fect negatively the biodiversity of the Iberian peninsula.2. Make the public aware of the responsibility involved inhaving exotic species as pets.

3. Increment social participation and involvement inenvironmental achievements.4. Prevent new exotic species from being introduced.

FORUM “INVASORAS”

In 1999, the forum “Invasoras” opened up in order toexchange information among the scientific communityabout IAS in Spain. The forum now has 130 members.

Objectives:1. To create a net of experts interested in this area.2. To promote the flow and exchange of ideas andinformation.3. To act as a site where access to all existinginformation about the problem is given in order to findsolutions to each specific problem quickly.4. To establish debates about existing problems andgive solutions.5. To coordinate action and collaboration.

“EEI 2003” FIRST NATIONAL CONFERENCE ONINVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES

Available Outputs:“Contribuciones al conocimiento de las especiesexóticas invasoras en España”.http://www.invasionesbiologicas.org/documentos/eei2003_libro.pdf“Anexos: Conclusiones Generales y Grupos deTrabajo”.http://www.invasionesbiologicas.org/documentos/anexos_eei2003.pdfForthcoming Biological Invasions (special issue):“Issues in bioinvasion science. ‘EEI 2003’: acontribution to the knowledge on invasive alienspecies”.(See also article in Aliens 18)

GEI had also followed the development of internationalstrategies on IAS, giving advice to the Spanishgovernment and taking part in international events.

Following international policies on biologicalinvasions, the Ministry of the Environment hascommissioned the service of a team (GENA-GEI) todesign a National Action Plan for IAS, which will befinalised by the end of 2005. The plan has a two-foldobjective: to identify problems created by IAS andsolutions in all relevant aspects: prevention, earlydetection, eradication, management and control,

awareness and education, regulation, policy and research.(See article in Aliens 18 for more details)

MONITORING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EURO-PEAN STRATEGY FOR IAS

The Recommendation 99 (2003) adopted by the StandingCommittee to the Bern Convention, recommends that Con-tracting Parties draw up and implement national strategieson invasive alien species taking into account the Euro-pean Strategy on IAS. In order to monitor how is imple-mented the European Strategy by Contracting Parties, theCouncil of Europe has entrusted a report to know if gov-ernments have drafted and implemented national IAS strat-egies or if they plan to do so in the future, and also whichprevention and control measures are being taken. Like-wise, to ensure that the knowledge of European Strategyon IAS will reach decision makers, GEI is carrying out apresentation leaflet on the European Strategy on IAS.

For further information:Laura Capdevila-Argüelles & Bernardo ZillettiGEI Co-ordinators

GEI Grupo Especies InvasorasE-mail: geiinvasoras@usuarios.retecal.esWebsite: http://www.invasionesbiologicas.org

I U C NThe World Conservation Union

The following organisations are gratefully acknowledged for theirsupport of the work of the Invasive Species Specialist Group:

US State Department NZAID (New Zealand Agency for International Development)

Manaaki Whenua-Landcare Research LimitedUniversity of Auckland, School of Geography and Environmental SciencesThe New Zealand Department of ConservationThe Pacific Development and Conservation TrustNational Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII), USA

Aliens is the bi-annual newsletter of the Invasive SpeciesSpecialist Group (ISSG). Its role is to put researchers,managers and/or practitioners in contact with each otherand to publish information and news of alien invasivespecies and issues. Contributions should focus on con-servation issues rather than economic, health or agricul-tural aspects of alien invasions. News of upcoming con-ferences, reports, and news of publications are also wel-come, especially where they are of major internationalrelevance. Please send your contributions, marked “for con-sideration for Aliens” to m.depoorter@auckland.ac.nz

The New Zealand-based Invasive Species Specialist Group(ISSG) is a specialist group of the Species Survival Com-mission (SSC) of the World Conservation Union (IUCN). Itis chaired by Mick Clout. The goals of the ISSG are toreduce threats to natural ecosystems and the native speciesthey contain - by increasing awareness of alien invasionsand of ways to prevent, control or eradicate them.

Aliens-L is a listserver dedicated to invasive species. Itallows users to freely seek and share information on alieninvasive species and issues, and the threats posed by themto the Earth’s biodiversity. To subscribe, send an emailwithout a subject header to: Aliens-L-join@indaba.iucn.org OR listadmin@indaba.iucn.orgwith the message: subscribe Aliens-L. When you havesubscribed you will receove a message with instructionsfor using the list. Most subscribers are English speaking,however, if you would like your message translated intoEnglish before posting it, please contactm.depoorter@auckland.ac.nz (we can currently deal withshort messages in Spanish, Italian, Dutch, French andArabic).

Cooperative Initiative on Invasive Alien Species on Islands.The aims of the Cooperative Initiative on Invasive IslandAlien Species on Islands are: to enhance empowermentand capacity in key areas of invasive alien species (IAS)management on islands; to facilitate cooperation andsharing of expertise; to help enable local, national andregional entities to identify invasive alien species problems,work out solutions and implement them resulting in im-provement in the conservation of island biologicaldiversity. ISSG will undertake the facilitation of this initia-tive, in partnership with New Zealand (as a Party to Con-

vention on Biological Diversity (CBD)) and under theumbrella of the Global Invasive Species Programme(GISP). This initiative is a recent development, and anyinterested individuals or institutions/agencies are encour-aged to participate.

The Global Invasive Species Database is freely availableon online at www.issg.org/database and mirrored atwww.invasivespecies.net/database. The development ofthe database, and the provision of content for it, isongoing. Priorities range from a focus on the some of theworld’s worst invasive species to a focus on areas whereinformation and resources are comparatively scarce, in-cluding small-island developing states and other islands.The database has images and descriptions for a widevariety of invasive species. Records for these speciesinclude information on the ecology, impacts, distribu-tion and pathways of the species, and most importantly,information on management methods as well as contactdetails of experts that can offer further advice. Thedatabase also provides links to numerous other sourcesof information. A major contribution is provided by IASexperts, researchers and managers who provideinformation or act as reviewers on a voluntary basis.

IUCN Guidelines for the Prevention of Biodiversity LossCaused by Alien Invasive Species http://iucn.org/themes/ssc/pubs/policy/invasivesEng.htm

ISSG Office: School of Geography and EnvironmentalSciences, University of Auckland (Tamaki Campus)Private Bag 92 019, Auckland, New ZealandPhone: #64 9 3737 599 x85210, Fax: #64 9 3737 042(Attention: ISSG)E-mail: issg@auckland.ac.nz for general inquiries.E-mail: m.depoorter@auckland.ac.nz to contact Alienseditor, or IAS mainstreaming or policy queries.E-mail: a.saunders@auckland.ac.nz for more informa-tion on the Cooperative Initiative on Island Alien Inva-sive Species.E-mail: m.browne@auckland.ac.nz to contact the Glo-bal Invasive Species Database manager.

Websites: ISSG: http://www.issg.org IUCN: http://iucn.org