Risk Assessment in a Changing Environment

D MINCHINDan MINCHINMarine Organism investigationsg g

Irelandii l d@ h imoiireland@yahoo.ie

TRADETRADEThe number of operatingoperating vectors, routes, speed of transferspeed of transfer in the spread of species has never been as great as now

Pathways for spread• Shipping • Canals• Aquaculture

Fi h i ‘ h t’• Fisheries ‘enhancement’• Ornamental

Live food trade• Live food trade• Leisure activities• Research and education• Research and education• Biocontrol• Alteration of water flowAlteration of water flow• Others• NATURAL SPREAD

Pathway certaintyPathway certainty

1. Direct evidenceornamentals aquaculture live food stockingornamentals, aquaculture, live food, stocking

Pathway certaintyPathway certainty

1. Direct evidenceornamentals aquaculture live food stockingornamentals, aquaculture, live food, stocking

2. Likely pathwaynearby activities and some additional evidence: shipsnearby activities and some additional evidence: ships

Pathway certaintyPathway certainty

1. Direct evidenceornamentals aquaculture live food stockingornamentals, aquaculture, live food, stocking

2. Likely pathwaynearby activities and some additional evidence: shipsnearby activities and some additional evidence: ships

3. Possible pathway(s)Often more than one possibilityOften more than one possibility

Aquaculture and vector overlapq pMar. Pollut. Bull. 55: 302-313 (2007)

Aquaculture:Aquaculture: 1 = seasonal holdings with raw water to 5 = high security culture

ManagementManagement

Needs to handle more than one matterone matter at a time

Management optionsManagement options

Pretend to do somethingg

Management optionsManagement options

Pretend to do somethingg

Do Nothing

Pacific parasite of eelsPacific parasite of eels

High capability of natural spread with:

Insects

Copepods (ballast water)Copepods (ballast water)

Downstream transmissionsDownstream transmissions

Management optionsManagement options

Pretend to do somethingg

Do Nothing

Do somethingDo something

Much depends on monitoringMuch depends on monitoring

• How to decide what to monitor for

• High impacting species known elsewhere• High impacting species known elsewhere

• High impacting species nearbyHigh impacting species nearby

• High impacting species via specific vectors

• Active vectors and their hubs• Active vectors and their hubs

• Times of transmission

Monitoring

Need to look inNeed to look in the right placeg p

Wh thWhere are the hubs?hubs?

What does one look for?look for?

Small craft routes

• Small craftSmall craft have special routes

• Small craft avoid seasonal storms

Small craft hullsSmall craft hulls• Are often idle• Are often idle

• Many are heavily fouled

• May be effectiveMay be effective inoculators

• Visit areas other hthan ports

The literature on alien species impacts continues to expand world-wide…

Caspian Sea:Caspian Sea:

The invasion of the comb jelly Mnemiopsis leidyi causes a 6-fold decrease in abundance of zooplankton, the only food p , ysource for the kilka (three species of Clupeonella). The white sturgeon (Huso huso) feeding on kilka, considered to be highly endangered.g y g

(Shiganova et al. 2001)

Spain:Spain:

The alien Louisiana red swamp crayfish Procambarus clarkii destructs 90% of the aquatic vegetation in a lake, whichdestructs 90% of the aquatic vegetation in a lake, which switches to the turbid state. Concentration of TP rises by 800%, the water chlorophyll content increases by 100%. The trophic status of the lake become hypertrophic.p yp p

(Rodrıguez et al., 2005)

Examples occur in all aquatic systems throughout the world

Australia:

The North Pacific sea star AsteriasThe North Pacific sea star Asterias amurensis: decline in abundance of commercial bivalves

(Ross et al., 2004)

California, USA:,

The European green crab Carcinus maenas: dramatic declines in the abundances of native clams Nutricola spp. and shore crabs Hemigrapsus oregonensis

(Grosholz 2002)(Grosholz, 2002)

Need for taxonomic skills

What to target and whereWhat to target and where

Taxonomy of the worldTaxonomy of the world

Species causing impact elsewhere

Where to monitor

How to monitor

Is rapid assessment possible?

Rapid assessmentRapid assessmentEXPANSION

• Ficopomatus• Styela

NEWDidemnum

NOT FOUNDUndariaStyela

• Undaria• Sargassum• Caprella

Corella

Botrylloides

Perophora

Rhithropanopeus• Caprella• Balanus• Haliplanella

Colpomenia

Monocorophium

• Colpomenia• Crepidula• Hemigrapsus• Crassostrea• Eriocheir• Elminius

Existing marinas Proposed marinas

4560 berths

NEW4 new species

25 new records

25

1 21 2

113

3

1

2 13

31

Didemnum vexillum found in IrelandLik l t i t lt d fi h iLikely to impact aquaculture and fisheries

•

Photo: Damien OfferPhoto: Damien Offeroto: a e O eoto: a e O ePhoto: Liz SidesPhoto: Liz Sides

Measuring impactMeasuring impactTo develop anTo develop an assessment method enabling comparisonenabling comparison of different aquatic ecosystems yaccording to the level of biopollution

i.e. according to the magnitude of impacts Sergej Olenin, UNIFOB, Norwaymagnitude of impacts of the alien species

g j , , yDarius Daunys, CRPI, LithuaniaDan Minchin, MOI, Ireland

Mar. Pollut. Bull. 55: 379-394 (2007)

No conventional methods t d th i t fto assess and compare the impacts of

alien invasive species

• Impacts vary(i.e. competition with native species, dominance in an invaded community, hybridisation, change in bottom sediments alteration of h drologicalin bottom sediments, alteration of hydrological regime, accumulation of toxic substances, modification of trophic chains etc )modification of trophic chains etc..)

P i t i diffi lt• Precise measurement is difficult

Biopollution assessment conceptopo ut o assess e t co ceptImpacts can vary in time

ange Arrival Establishment Expansion Adjustment

butio

n R

ae

& D

istri

bbu

ndan

ceA

b

Modified from: Reise, Olenin. Thieltges (2006). Helgoland Marine Research, 60 (2): 106–112

MethodMethodE i di t ib ti d b d• Examine distribution and abundance

• Related these ranges with levels of impactsimpacts

• Develop an assessment based on the relation between distribution and abundance ranges and the level of impacts

AbundanceAbundance• “Low” numbers small in relation to• Low –numbers small in relation to

abundance of relevant native community ( h t l kt b th fi h)(e.g. phytoplankton, zoobenthos or fish)

• “Moderate” - less than a half of b d f th ti itabundance of the native community

• “High” - dominates the invaded communitycommunity.

DistributionDistribution• Relative scale: the distribution area of an alien

i i l t d t th i f tspecies is related to the size of an assessment unit – You choose the assessment size

a sea a coastal zone a coastal lagoon an inlet

Several localitiesOne locality All localitiesMany localities

“an alien species found in ”an alien species found in…

12 possible combinations of12 possible combinations of Abundance and Distribution Ranges are narrowed down to 5 (A-E) Classes

to create a one-dimensional scaleto create a one dimensional scale

Abundance Distribution scaleOne Several Many All

locality localitiesy

localities localitiesLow A A B CModerate B B C DHigh B C D EHigh B C D E

Five classes representing theFive classes representing the combined Abundance and

Di t ib ti f Ali S iDistribution range of Alien SpeciesCode Descriptionp

A An AS occurs in low numbers in one or severallocalities

B An AS occurs in low numbers in many localities or inmoderate numbers in one or several localities

C An AS occurs in low numbers in all localities, or in moderatenumbers in many localities, or in high numbers in severallocalities

D An AS occurs in moderate numbers in all localities, or in highnumbers in many localities

E An AS occurs in high numbers in all localities

R ki h iRanking the impactsW id t l th i t• We consider separately the impacts on:

• Communities• The changes caused in native species composition and

abundance, including shifts in type-specific communities,

• HabitatsHabitats• The degree of habitat modification

• EcosystemEcosystem• The level of impact on ecosystem processes.

• The magnitude of these impacts is interrelated, g p ,but…

» Dividing into three separate groups facilitates an assessmentassessment…

Classification of alien species impact on communities

C d I t D i tiCode Impact Description

C 0 None No displacement of native species. Ranking of native species, according toabundance/biomass/coverage, in the community remains unchanged, e.g. thearrival of a new alien species increased species richness. Type-specificcommunities are present.

C 1 Weak Local displacement of native species, but no extinction. Change in ranking ofC 1 Weak p p , g gnative species, according to abundance/biomass/coverage, but does not lead toa shift in native dominant species. Type-specific communities are present.

C 2 Moderate Large scale displacement of native species causes decline in abundance andC 2 Moderate g p preduction of their distribution range within the ecosystem, and/or type-specificcommunities are changed noticeably due to shifts in community dominantspecies.

C 3 Strong Species extinctions within the ecosystem. Former community dominantspecies still present but their relative abundance is severely reduced; alienspecies are dominant. No type-specific community is present within theecological groupecological group

C 4 Massive Extinctions of native key species. Extinction of type-specific communitiesoccurs within more than one ecological group.

Classification of alien species impact on Habitats

Code Impact Description

H 0 None No habitat alteration

H 1 Weak Alteration of a habitat(s), but no reduction of spatial extent of a habitat(s).

H 2 Moderate Alteration, reduction of spatial extent of a h bit t( )habitat(s).

H 3 Strong Alteration, severe reduction of spatial extent of a habitat(s); loss of habitat(s) within aof a habitat(s); loss of habitat(s) within a small area of the assessment unit.

H 4 Massive Loss of habitats in most or the entire H 4 Massiveassessment unit.

Classification of alien species impact E ton the Ecosystem functioning

Code Impact Description

E 0 None No measurable effect

E 1 Weak Measurable, but weak changes with no loss oraddition of new ecosystem function(s).

E 2 M d t M d t difi ti f tE 2 Moderate Moderate modification of ecosystemperformance and/or addition of a new, orreduction of existing, functional group(s) in part ofthe assessment unit.

E 3 Strong Severe shifts in ecosystem functioning, resultingfrom e g removal of functional group(s)from e.g. removal of functional group(s),cascading effects from introduced diseases

E 4 Massive Extreme, ecosystem-wide shift in the food webE 4 Massive Extreme, ecosystem wide shift in the food weband/or loss of the role of a functional group(s).

DM1

Dia 37

DM1 Dan Minchin; 8-12-2008

ImpactImpactCommunity Habitat Ecosystem

None C0 H0 E0None C0 H0 E0

Weak C1 H1 E1Weak C1 H1 E1

Moderate C2 H2 E2

Strong C3 H3 E3

Massive C4 H4 E4

In order to make the assessment system operable 49 possible situations are narrowed down to

Five Biopollution Levels (BPL): 0 – No; 1 – Weak, 2 – Moderate, 3 – Strong and0 No; 1 Weak, 2 Moderate, 3 Strong and

4 – Massive.

Several situations - same biopollution level: 3 (BPL=0), 12 (BPL=1), 15 (BPL=2), 12 (BPL=3), 7 (BPL=4).

The decision tsupport

scheme forscheme for assessment

of Biopollution Level (BPL)Level (BPL)

• The assessment is performed for each alien species in the given assessmentalien species in the given assessment unit.

It i hi hl lik l th t i i l» It is highly unlikely that species, causing more or less serious changes in the invaded system (i.e. BPL>1) would remain unnoticed.

• The assessment unit is a defined water bodybody.

» (coastal lagoon, part of a coastal zone according to the WFD typology, a small lake or an entire sea).

• The assessment should be performed for a certain period of timefor a certain period of time.

Th BPL f AS i d t i d• The BPL for one AS is determined according to its greatest impact level.g g

• The overall BPL for the assessment unit is determined according to the greatestis determined according to the greatest impact level for at least one species which was noticed during the evaluationwhich was noticed during the evaluation period.

An example from the Curonian Lagoon and the open SE coastal g p

zone of the Baltic Sea

Th h b t di d i l 1920 th h iThe areas have been studied since early 1920s; the comprehensive recent overviews are available on benthic biotopes and

communities (Olenin and Daunys 2004), composition of native biota (Zettler and Daunys 2006) and invasion biology (Olenin and Leppakoski, 1999; Olenin 2005; Daunys and Zettler, 2006; Daunys

et al., 2006)

Biopollution assessment systemBiopollution assessment systemAccount for assessment unit:

Curonian Lagoon(Europe, Lithuania)

p yp yAssessment period:

1800-2007Author:

D. DaunysSummary

( p )

SpeciesAbundance & Distribution

Range

Impact on Community

Impact on Habitat

Impact on Ecosystem

Biopollution Level

1. Balanus improvisus A 1 1 0 1p A 1 1 0 12. Chaetogammarus warpachowskyi B 1 1 1 13. Cordylophora caspia B 2 2 1 24. Chelicorophium curvispinum B 1 1 1 1p p B 1 1 1 1

5. Dreissena polymorpha D 2 3 2 36. Limnomysis benedeni B 2 1 2 27. Obesogammarus crassus C 2 2 2 28. Paramysis lacustris C 2 1 2 29. Pontogammarus robustoides C 2 2 2 210. Cercopagis pengoi B 2 1 1 211. Gammarus tigrinus B 1 1 1 112. Marenzelleria neglecta C 2 2 2 2... ... ... ... ... ...27. Neogobius melanostomus A 0 0 0 028. Prorocentrum minimum A 0 0 0 0***

Biopollution assessment systemBiopollution assessment systemSummary for assessment unit:

Curonian Lagoon(Europe, Lithuania)

p yp yAssessment period:

1800-2007Author:

D. Daunys( p )

Abundance & Distribution Range

cies 25

25

30

Biopollution level

cies 26

25

30

mbe

r of s

pec

17

5

10

15

20

mbe

r of s

pec

17

55

10

15

20

Num 2 1

0

5

A B C D E

Num 2

00

5

0 1 2 3 4

I t

communities habitats ecosystems

Impacts on:

2630

2630

2630ci

es

26

17

5

10

15

20

25

17

55

10

15

20

2526

17

5

10

15

20

25

mbe

r of s

pec

5

20

0

5

C0 C1 C2 C3 C4

20

0

5

H0 H1 H2 H3 H4

20

0

5

E0 E1 E2 E3 E4

Num

Shannon River0

132 33 23 2

1

31

1Zebra mussel

1

1

33

33 Lough Derg310

g g2007

Examples of impacting invadersExamples of impacting invaders

Britain EuropeCrepidula fornicata 3 3Gyrodactylus salaris 3P d bPseudorasbora parva 3 3Eriocheir sinesis 2 2Ensis americanus 3 3U d i i tifid 3 2Undaria pinnatifida 3 2Dikerogammarus ill

3villosus

Biopollution as a toolBiopollution as a toolC t it ti• Compare assessment units over time

• Compare similar assessment units

• Map impacts

• Predict impacting invadersPredict impacting invaders

P i iti th f t• Prioritise those for management

So where will the invaders come from?

Past waves• Colonial

T d• Trade

So where will the invaders come from?

Past waves• Colonial

T d• Trade Current waves• Trade

G d / t l• Gardeners/ornamental • Ponto-Caspian/ ErythreanPonto Caspian/ Erythrean• Reduced toxicity (i.e. TBT

d li )decline)

The gardeners handg

General decline of TBT in the Irish environment

Irish ports

25

20

25

10

15

g/l T

BT

5

10n

01985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

So where will the invaders come from?

Past wavesC l i l• Colonial

• Trade Current wavesCurrent waves• Trade • Gardeners/ornamental• Gardeners/ornamental • Ponto-Caspian/ Erthryean• Water Framework (i.e. TBT decline)Water Framework (i.e. TBT decline)Future wave

P ifi i i• Pacific incursion• Climate alteration• GMO

New trading routes

• Seasonal routes through arctic gsea likely to open within pdecades

• Oil exploration likelylikely

Climate changesClimate changes

• Extreme storm events leading to stockleading to stock escapes

• Increased temperatures andtemperatures and species ranges and new opportunities fornew opportunities for exotic species

Future expected invasion trendsFuture expected invasion trends

Thank you for listeningThank you for listening

Dan Minchin ++353 86 60 80 888Dan Minchin ++353-86-60-80-888moiireland@yahoo iemoiireland@yahoo.ie

www.aquaticinvasions.comq- free information on invaders

Ornamental pond plants rapidlyplants rapidly

speadingspeading

Communicating

Different happroaches

The Killybegs plumeThe Killybegs plume

• Effects inEffects in snails can bebe identified 12km+ from source

Tag-rugby team Invadersg g yspreading the message

U d iUndariaCorellaAzollaAzollaCrepidulaKareniaStyelaElodea

HirudoAlexandriumAlexandriumElminiusCrangonyxSargassum

MANAGEMENTMANAGEMENT

• PRE-BORDER MANAGEMENT– ProactiveProactive

POST-BORDER MANAGEMENT– TraditionalTraditional

Pre border management LOWPre-border management LOW• options exist that include prohibition or quality assurance• Ornamental plants

A i i• Aquarium species• Researched species• Undischarged dredge spoil• Undischarged dredge spoil• Shell cultch• Habitat managementHabitat management• Floating aircraft• Aquaculture species (quarantined)Aquaculture species (quarantined)• Certified stock fish• Fouling on decommission shipsg p• Water supply movements

Post-border Management LOW

• Quarantine• ContainmentContainment• Destruction on arrival• Treatment on arrival (brine dip)• Certified stock releases• Certified stock releases• Refusal of entry

Pre-border management MODERATE

• Overland boat movements• Imported live foodsImported live foods• Live food for rearing stock• Imported dredged aggregates

Post-border Management MODERATE

• Ornamental plants• Aquarium species• Researched speciesResearched species• Undischarged dredge spoil• Shell cultch• Habitat management• Habitat management• Floating aircraft• Aquaculture species (quarantined)

C tifi d t k fi h• Certified stock fish• Fouling on decommission ships• Water supply movements• Angling competitions• Live food products• Trawling activities g

Pre border Management HIGHPre-border Management HIGH

• Direct aquaculture stock imports• Imported living baitsImported living baits• Continental/Island canal expansion• Shipping: ballast management• Shipping: fouled hulls• Shipping: fouled hulls

Post-border Management HIGH

• Imported aquaculture stockI t d li i b it• Imported living baits

• Continental/Island canal expansion• Shipping: ballast management• Shipping: fouled hulls• Meteorological events• Current & tidal movementsCurrent & tidal movements• Illegal fishing /stocking activities• Improvements in water quality• Improvements in water quality

Pre border optionsPre-border options

• Legislation and regulation• Risk assessmentsRisk assessments• Determine target species• Border management• Expert forum• Expert forum• Up-to-date distribution knowledge

Post border optionsPost-border optionsR i it i• Requires monitoring

• Eradication• Mitigation• Reduce spread

• Does not require monitoringDoes not require monitoring• Quarantine• Do nothing• Do nothing

EradicationEradication

• Early in invasion processAmerican muskrat (Irl)– American muskrat (Irl)

– Mytilopsis sallei (Australia)y p ( )–Caulerpa taxifolia (USA)–Abalone-shell worm (USA)

ManagementManagement

• Pre-border and post border• Mangement responseMangement response• Expert forum• Pre-determined actions• Monitoring• Monitoring• Public involvement

DEFINITIONDEFINITION

Definition of biopollutionDefinition of biopollutionElliott, M., 2003. Biological pollutants and biological pollution – an increasing cause for concern.

Marine Pollution Bulletin 46: 275-280.

• “The effects of introduced, invasive species sufficient to disturb

• an individual(internal biological pollution by parasites or pathogens),a population• a population(by genetical change) or

• a community• a community(by increasing or decreasing the species complement);

i l di th d ti f dincluding the production of adverse economic consequences”

EU Water Framework Directive and alien species

• WFD (Directive 2000/60/EC) aims to improve• WFD (Directive 2000/60/EC) aims to improve the water quality of rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal waterscoastal waters

• No explicit mentioning of alien species and their potential impact on ecological quality,potential impact on ecological quality, – although

in the Guidance Document “Common implementation strategy for WFD…” the introduction of alien species is given as an example of biological pressure and impactimpact.

Virtually allE l i l Q lit I di t (E Q)Ecological Quality Indicators (EcoQ)used in WFD may be effected by alien species

BIOLOGICAL HYDRO-MORPHOLOGICAL•Phytoplankton•Phytobenthos•Macrofauna

•Changes in sediment transport•Water flow•Channel patterns

•Fish •Conditions of the shore zones•Substrate conditions

PHYSICO CHEMICAL D t b t dPHYSICO-CHEMICAL•Nutrients•Salinity

Database created:

276 case studies•Transparency•Oxygen•Synthetic pollutants

H

~120 alien species show impact on various WFD EcoQ indicators

•pH•Temperature in lakes, rivers, transitional and coastal

waters

Baseline and managementBaseline and management assessmentsassessments

• The baseline assessment is made for the period before 19851985

• (in this case the year was chosen arbitrarily aiming to summarise all existing information on impacts of AS and evaluate the general level of biopollution in the four selected areas).areas).

• The management assessment is made for the period from 1986 to 2005 with the aim to record the changes in BPL f th ti h th b li tBPL from the time when the baseline assessment was made

• and, presumably, some managerial measures have been undertaken in order to i i i i k f i t d timinimise risk of new introductions.

• In general, such management assessment should help to evaluate the effectiveness of the managementg

Baseline assessment to 1985

•24 aliens species found,p ,

•10 (BPL ≥ 1) at least in one of four assessment units, The overall•one species (BPL=3),

•no one (BPL=4)

The overall BPL=3

The management assessment for the period 1986-2005

5 li i•5 new alien species appear,

•four species with (BPL=2) at least in one as. units,

one species (BPL=3) no one (BPL=4)

The overall BPL=3•one species (BPL=3), no one (BPL=4) BPL=3

Evaluation: “bad management”

Co operationCo-operation

Working withWorking with invasive species is an internationalinternational issue

Biopollution assessment conceptBiopollution assessment concept• An alien species will

produce measurable effects only after attaining y ga particular level of abundance and when occupying a sufficiently large area.

• Assessing biopollution we should consider:

the relative abundance of ang

• At the largest level of population expansion an

– the relative abundance of an alien species,

– its distribution rangepopulation expansion an invader has the greatest impact

– and the magnitude of impacts

impact.

Assessment of biopollution level (BPL, 0-4)Assessment of biopollution level (BPL, 0 4)based on the abundance/distribution range classes

and the magnitude of alien species impacts on: communities (C), habitats (H) and ecosystem function (E).

Discrimination of 26 highly unlikely combinations g y yof ADR classes and impacts leaves 49 possible situationsp

in which biopollution may be assessed

75 combinations, 26 of them are highly unlikely ( k d ith “ ”)(marked with “-”).

e.g. if ADR = A (an AS occurs in low numbers in few localities), it is improbable that it may cause displacement of native species large scale changes in physical structure of habitats or serious modification of ecosystem functioningnative species, large scale changes in physical structure of habitats or serious modification of ecosystem functioning.

In contrast, if ADR = D or E (high numbers in many or all localities), an AS will definitely cause at least some changes in the community structure or ecosystem performance, hence, situation of “No measurable impact” is very unlikely.

ConclusionConclusionThe biopollution index enables comparison• The biopollution index enables comparison – between different water bodies,

» (BPL in assessment units X and Z)b t i di id l li i– between individual alien species

» (species A vs species B),– impact of the same species in different aquatic ecosystems

( i A i t it X d Z)» (species A in assessment units X and Z), – impacts of the same species A through time

» (following the invasion phases – “boom and bust”)

• The BPL index may be used to evaluate the• The BPL index may be used to evaluate the effectiveness of measures aimed on prevention of new introductions.

• Further work: – practical use of BPL index, refining of the BPL scale– incorporation of BPL into WFD assessment schemesincorporation of BPL into WFD assessment schemes

The teamDarius Daunys Dan MinchinSergej Olen

Coastal Research & Planning Institute, Klaipeda University,

Lithuania

Marine Organism InvestigationsIreland

UNIFOB, Bergen , Norway