dfo library mpo l a il llllllll ilill - library 1 mpo - bibliothèi i l a ilill il llllllll 7...

DFO - Library 1 MPO - Bibliothèi

I l A IlIll IlIll Il IlIll IlIll IlIll IlIll llllllll 14007225

7 s y n o w of the situation regarding the introduction of nonindigenous species by ship-transported ballast water in Canada and selected countries

Daniel Gauthier and Deborah A. Steel

Marine Environmental Sciences Division Fisheries and Oceans Canada Maurice Lamontagne Institute P.O. Box 1000, 850 route de la Mer Mont-Joli (Québec) Canada G5H 324

Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 2380

No 2380 Ex. 1 Fisheries Pêches 1 and Oceans et Ocbans

Canadian Manuscript Report

of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 2380

A SYNOPSIS OF THE SITUATION REGARDING THE INTRODUCTION OF

NONINDIGENOUS SPECIES BY SHIP-TRANSPORTED BALLAST WATER

IN CANADA AND SELECTED COUNTRIES

D. Gauthier' and D.A. Steel',3

Marine Environmental Sciences Division Fisheries and Oceans Canada Maurice Lamontagne Institute

P.O. Box 1000, 850 route de la Mer Mont-Joli (Québec) Canada G5H 324

' 93 1 1 l th Ave, Laval (Québec) Canada H7R 4M8 - email: [email protected] ' National Energy Board, 3 1 1 6th ave S.W., Calgary (Alberta) Canada T2P 3H2 ' Authors narnes in alphabetical order

O Minister of Public Works and Government Services of Canada 1996 Cat. No. Fs 97-4/2380 ISSN 0706-6473

Correct citation for this publication:

Gauthier, D. and D.A. Steel. 1996. A synopsis of the situation regarding the introduction of nonindigenous species by ship-transported ballast water in Canada and selected countries. Can. Manuscr. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2380: vi + 57 p.

Ce rapport est également disponible en français.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF TABLES v

LISTOFFIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.0 VESSEL TRAFFIC IN CANADA

3.0 REGULATORY ASPECTS AND MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES IN CANADA . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 GULF OF ST LAWRENCE 5

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 GREAT LAKES AND ST . LAWRENCE RIVER AND ESTUARY 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3PACIFICREGION 7

4.0 SCIENTIFICACTIVITIES INCANADA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 STUDIES ON THE INTRODUCTION OF SPECIES 8

4.2OTHERSTUDIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 ONGOING AND PROPOSED RESEARCH 13

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.0 THE INTERNATIONAL SITUATION 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 17

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.1. Regulatory aspects and management activities 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.2. Scientific activities 21

5.2AUSTRALIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.1. Regulatory aspects and management activities 24

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.2. Scientific activities 26 5.3NEWZEALAND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.1. Regulatory aspects and management activities 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.2. Scientific activities 33

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 OTHER COUNTRIES 34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.1 Regulatory aspects and management activities 34

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.2. Scientific activities 35

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.0 POSSIBLE CONTROLS AND TREATMENTS 37 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1TREATMENTMETHODS 37

6.1.1Physical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 6.1.2Chemical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2 NON-TREATMENT OPTIONS 41

8.0 ACKNO WLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6

9.0REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 . Vesse1 traffic and estimated discharges of ballast water from foreign origin . . . . . . . 4

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2 . Examples of suspected ballast-water mediated introductions 9

. . . . . . . . . . . . Table 3 . Suspected ballast-water mediated introductions in Australian waters 27

LIST OF FIGURES

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Figure 1 . The St . Lawrence-Great Lakes Seaway 3

ABSTRACT


Each year, vessels transport hundreds of million of tonnes of ballast water around the world. Those waters and associated sediments contain hundreds of species of organisms, of which many have established in new habitats and caused negative effects to human health, economy and environment. This report describes the Canadian situation, in its international context, regarding the introductionof nonindigenous species by ship-transported ballast water, reviewing specifically vesse1 traffic, regulations, management and scientific research activities, and possible controls and treatments. Essentially, the international recognition of the problem has not led to concrete action in countries other than Australia, the United States, and more recently, Israel and Chile. Canada is particularly vulnerable to the introduction of nonindigenous species by ships, considering the large quantities of ballast water discharged in its ports and the near absence of control measures in regions other than the Great Lakes. As for many countries, Canada needs to assess the risks posed to its aquatic habitats and resources.


Chaque année, les navires transportent des centaines de millions de tonnes d'eau de lest autour du monde. Ces eaux et les sédiments qui y sont associés, contiennent des centaines d'espèces d'organismes, parmi lesquels plusieurs se sont établis dans de nouveaux habitats et ont causé des effets négatifs sur la santé humaine, l'économie et l'environnement. Ce rapport décrit la situation canadienne, dans son contexte international, concernant l'introduction d'espèces nonindigènes par les eaux de lest transportées par les navires, examinant particulièrement le trafic maritime, la réglementation, les activités de gestion et de recherche scientifique, ainsi que les contrôles et les traitements possibles. Essentiellement, la reconnaissance internationale du problème n'a pas donné lieu à des actions concrètes dans d'autres pays que l'Australie, les États-unis et, plus récemment, Israel et le Chili. Le Canada est particulièrement vulnérable à l'introduction d'espèces nonindigènes par les navires, compte tenu des grandes quantités d'eau de lest déversées dans ses ports et de la quasi absence de mesures de contrôle dans les régions autres que les Grands Lacs. À l'instar de plusieurs pays, le Canada a besoin d'évaluer les risques qui se posent à ses habitats et ressources aquatiques.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Worldwide introductions of plants, animals and pathogens to new habitats as a result of human activities, are having dramatic impacts on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems (Biodiversity Science Assessment Team 1994). Ballast water, taken on for vesse1 stability in one port of call and released in another, has been identified as a likely vector for the introduction of nurnerous species in coastal watenvays in Canada (Leach et al. 1995, Locke et al. 1993, Mills et al. 1993a,b) and worldwide (Carlton 1995). If the ballast water is taken in a shallow port or is very turbid, sediments and associated organisms as well as those suspended in the water column are transferred into the ballast tanks. Subsequent ballast water discharges in ports of call have sometimes resulted in the introduction of non-native species, with major ecological and economic consequences in regards to effects on human health, fishing and aquaculture activities. The openings of the Suez Canal in 1869, the Panama Canal in 1914 and the St. Lawrence Seaway in 1959, along with the increased speed of modern cargo vessels, have reduced the lengths of voyages between countries. As total water ballast tonnage can range from a few hundred to over 100,000 metric tonnes, considerable arnounts of water and accompanying viable organisms are being rapidly transported worldwide on a continuous basis.

Ships have used water as ballast since the introduction of steel-hulled vessels over one hundred years ago. However, it is only in the past twenty years that there has been international recognition of potential problems associated with the discharge of ballast waters. In 1991, the Marine Environment Protection Cornrnittee (MEPC) of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), a specialized agency of the United Nations, adopted the voluntary International Gtridelines for Preventing the Introduction of Unwanted Aquatic Organisms and PathogensJFom Ships' Ballast Waters and Sediment Discharges. Four specific cases of ballast-mediated species introductions have generated worldwide attention and convinced some IMO Member Countries that action was required:

- the introduction of the European zebra musse1 (Dreissena polymorpha) in the North American Great Lakes, resulting in millions of dollars per year for population control and cleaning of fouled undenvater structures and waterpipes;

- the introduction of the American comb jelly (Mnemiopsis leidyi) to the Black and Azov Seas, causing near extinction of the the anchovy and sprat fisheries;

- the introduction of the Japanese brown kelp (Undaria pinnatzfida) to Tasmanian waters, having detrimental impacts on the abalone and sea urchins fisheries; and

- the introduction of the South-east Asian dinoflagellates of the generas Gymnodinium and Alexandrium into Australian waters, which cause Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning.

In September 1995, IMO Member Countries first attempted to develop the voluntary Guidelines into regulations for inclusion in the MAWOL 73/78 Convention - the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution JFom Ships. These regulations would include obligations of Member Countries, definitions, application, exceptions, operational and safety requirements and the role of national authorities (Nauke 1995).

With the problem of introductions of non-native species via ballast waters gaining increasing environment al and economic recognition in Canada and worldwide, the objectives of this report are: 1) to detail the Canadian situation regarding vessel traffic, regulations, management activities and scientific studies; 2) to review the international situation; and 3) to present possible controls and treatments for the management of ballast water discharges.

2.0 VESSEL TRAFFIC IN CANADA

In Canada, shipping routes traverse sections of the country's coastline along the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic Oceans, and Gulf of St. Lawrence. Also, a series of locks allows the navigation of vessels from a variety of international ports, to proceed through the St. Lawrence Seaway into the Great Lakes and up to the head of Lake Superior, a distance of 3,769 km from the Atlantic Ocean (Figure 1).

For the Canadian Atlantic coast, the Eastern Canada Region - Vesse1 Traffic Services (ECAREG-VTS) database reported 1,377 foreign vessel entries in 1991. Vessels originated from ports bordering the Northeast Atlantic and West Central Atlantic (Cape Cod to Venezuela) in respective proportions of 40% and 11%, although their ballast waters may have been taken on during the voyage. Of the 1012 vessels originating from a last-port-of-cal1 (LPOC) that was outside the Northwest Atlantic area (Table l), respectively 68%, 30% and 2% entered the ports of Halifax in Nova Scotia, St. John in New Brunswick and St. John's in Newfoundland, discharging 2.1, 2.6 and 0.02 million tonnes of ballast water for an estimated total of 4.7 million tonnes of ballast water of foreign origin (D.M. Reid, pers. comrn.).

Based on the ECAREG-VTS database, a total of 762 vessels, 612 of which were foreign vessels, entered the major ports of the Estuary and Gulf of St. Lawrence in 1993 (DFO unpubl.). Of these, 526 originated from a LPOC that was outside the Northwest Atlantic area. some 47%. 26% and 18% originating respectively from Northeast Atlantic (excluding Mediterranea), the Atlantic United States and Mediterranea. These ships entered the ports of Port-Cartier, sept-Îles and Baie- Comeau in proportions of 23%. 21% and 14 %, respectively. Based on figures calculated from discharges of ballast water in ports from Montréal to Québec City (D.M. Reid, pers. comm.), and taking into account the proportions of vessels arriving "in ballast" or "in cargo" it is estimated that about 6.1 million tonnes of ballast water from foreign origin were discharged in the Estuary and Gulf of St. Lawrence during 1993 (Table 1) of which 1.7, 1.6 and 0.7 million tonnes were discharged respectively in the ports of Port-Cartier, sept-Îles and Baie-Comeau (DFO unpubl.).

For the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence River system, the ECAREG-VTS database reported 755 vessel entries in 1991 of which 735 originated from a LPOC that was outside the Northwest Atlantic area. Of these 735 vessels, 56% and 16% originated respectively from Northeast Atlantic (excluding Mediterranea) and Mediterranea (D.M. Reid, pers. comm.); and 56.6% and 43.4% entered respectively the ports upstream of Montréal and those from Québec City to Montréal. Since ships entering the Great Lakes typically contained about 7,500 m3 of ballast water (Sprules et al. 1990), it is estimated that respectively 1.4 and 1.1 million tonnes of ballast water from

JO* 60; 45' '1 5' 70' 95'

Ocean

$5. 716. t'o. de *

Figure 3. The St. Lawrence-Great Lakes Seaway.

foreign origin were discharged in the ports upstream of Montréal and in those from Québec City to Montréal in 1991 (D.M. Reid, pers. comrn.).

For the Pacific coast, the Vancouver and Prince-Rupert port authorities reported respectively 3,117 and 398 foreign vesse1 entries in 199 1, of which 3,023 and 3 86 originated from a LPOC that was outside the Northeast Pacific. Respectively 78% and 13% of these vessels originated from ports bordering the Northwest Pacific and West Central Pacific - Indonesia. These vessels discharged respectively an estimated 33.5 and 5.4 million tonnes of ballast water from foreign origin in the ports of Vancouver and Prince-Rupert, for a total of about 38.9 million tonnes (Table 1) (D.M. Reid, pers. comm.).

Table 1. Vesse1 traffic and estimated discharges of ballast water from foreign origin.

Ports Year Vessels Discharges (1 o6 t)

Atlantic: Halifax (N.S.), St. John (N.B.) 1991 1,012, 4.7 , St. John's (Nfld.)

Estuary and Gulf of St. Lawrence: sept-Îles, Port- 1993 5 2 0 , 6.1 , Cartier, Baie-Comeau, Gaspé and Cacouna (Qué.); Cornerbrook and Stephenville (Nfld); Dalhousie and Belledune (N.B.); and Summerside (P.E.I.)

Great Lakes: Canadian and U.S. ports, Montréal and 1991 744 , 2.5 Québec (Qué.)

Pacific: Vancouver and Prince-Rupert (B.C.) 1991 3409 38.9 ;

Areas other than Northwest Atlantic - mostly West Central Atlantic (Cape Cod to Venezuela), Northeast Atlantic and the Mediterranean Areas other than Northeast Pacific - mostly Northwest Pacific, West Central Pacific (Indonesia) D.M. Reid, pers. comm.

, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, unpubl. data

3.0 REGULATORY ASPECTS AND MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES IN CANADA

By providing the authority to prohibit the release of a pollutant into harbour or coastal waters, Part XV of the Canada Shipping Act, Pollution Prevention and Response, is currently the only regulation related to ballast water which applies to al1 vessels entering Canadian ports. Presently,

the regulations made pursuant to Part XV apply only to ballast on oil tankers or chemical carriers. Thus, based on this definition, ballast waters without oil or chemicals are considered to be clean and can be released in, or taken on from any Canadian harbour or coastal waters, with a few exceptions, as discussed below.

3.1 GULF OF ST. LAWRENCE

The threat of introduction of toxic phytoplankton to local musse1 f m i n g industries prompted the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) in 1982 to issue the Notice to Mariners #995. This yearly renewed notice prohibits ships bound for the Mines Seleine's pier, situated in the Grande Entrée Lagoon of the Îles-de-la-~adeleine, Gulf of St. Lawrence (Figure 1). from discharging their ballast waters within 1 O nautical miles of the Islands unless these waters were taken on in a well-defined area off Canada's east Coast, at a distance of 5 miles or greater from the shoreline.

3.2 GREAT LAKES AND ST. LAWRENCE RIVER AND ESTUARY

Jurisdictionalmanagement of the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence River system is complex because of the involvement of two federal, two provincial and eight state governments, and numerous environmental groups and transport associations. Policies and management perspectives are now provided by the International Joint Commission and the Great Lakes Fishery Commission (GLFC) in accordance with binational treaties and agreements. The latter Commission was created in 1955 by the Governments of Canada and the United States, spuned by the devastation wreaked on the Great Lakes commercial fisheries by the invading sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) in the early 1940's and 1950's. Its mandate is to advise governments on measures and issues affecting fish stocks of common concern to Great Lakes fisheries, including the prevention, control and management of nonindigenous species (Dochoda 1991).

In 1987, the governments of Canada and the United States signed the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement to cooperate in developing and implementing Remedial Action Plans, Fishery Management Plans and Lakewide Management Plans (LaMPs). In addition, Article VI and Annexes 4 to 9 of this Agreement address pollution issues from shipping activities, including ballast water, and assign specific coordinating, enforcement and reporting function to the U.S. and Canadian Coast Guards (Dochoda et al. 1990). Administered by two federal governments, four States, one province and several native governments, LaMPs are currently being developed for al1 the Great Lakes. The goal of these plans is to identify the remediai actions necessary to reduce loadings of critical pollutants in order to restore impaired habitat and uses in the Great Lakes (Hartig et al. 1996). The ballast water component of-these LaMPs are currently being reviewed by Environment Canada and Transport Canada (C. Wiley, pers. comm.)

In May 1989, the CCG following consultation with the U.S. Coast Guard, the GLFC, the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the Department of Environment, as well as representatives from the shipping industry, promulgated the Voluntary Guidelines for the Control of Ballast Water Discharges from Ships. These guidelines apply to al1

vessels canying ballast water and originating from outside the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) - beyond 200 nautical miles from shore - that are entering the St. Lawrence Estuary and proceeding up the Seaway to ports West of 63" W longitude - modified to 64' W in 1995. Seaway sized domestic carriers or "lakers" are not subject to these guidelines as they do not operate outside the EEZ.

According to the Guidelines, vessels are requested to exchange their ballast water on the high seas where depths are greater than 2000 m, before entering the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The primary objective in exchanging ballast water for open ocean water is to exchange coastal organisms taken .

at the port of origin for those taken in open ocean, the latter of which which are less likely to survive and reproduce in the freshwaters of the Great Lakes (Dochoda 1989).

From February 28 to March 2, 1990, the International Joint Commission (IJC) and the GLFC held a workshop in Toronto, Ontario entitled "Exotic Species and the Shipping Industry". The workshop's recommendationsto the IJC-GLFC were: to report to Canadian and U.S. govemments the need for immediate action to prevent future introductions; to continue promoting the voluntary Canadian guidelines while assessing the level of compliance; to encourage support of IMO's MEPC action in developing international guidelines; and to investigate ways to obtain active support and cooperation from the shipping industry (Dochoda et al. 1990). Subsequently, the IJC and GLFC jointly published a report intitled: "Exotic Species and the Shipping Industry: The Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Ecosystem at Risk" (IJC-GLFC 1990).

Control of compliance with the above guidelines begins with information supplied to the ECAREG-VTS operators from vessels entering entering Canadian waters. If a ship is proceeding up the seaway and into the Great Lakes, it will be requested to exchange its ballast water in open ocean at depths greater than 2000 m. If this is not technically feasible, due to structural limitations and safety concerns, ships are permitted to conduct an exchange in a "backup exchange zone" within the Laurentian Trough of the Lower St. Lawrence Estuary, to the east of 64" W longitude, in water depths greater than 300 m (Figure 1). Once contact with ECAREG-VTS operators has been established, foreign vessels typically pick up a pilot at Les Escoumins where they are given a "Ballast Water Exchange Form" to be completed prior to their arriva1 at the St. Lambert locks in Montréal. The information is then verified verbally and vessels are considered to be in compliance with these guidelines if they cany: no ballast water; residual ballast water that could not be completely expelled; permanent ballast water; ballast water that is not intended to be discharged in the Great Lakes; or ballast water that has been exchanged offshore or in the Laurentian Trough. A fine of up to $50,000 may be imposed for providing false information.

Ballast Water Exchange Reports from ships reveal a high proportion of compliance. Non- compliance is primarily because of safety issues, such as structural integrity of the vessel, loss of stability and propeller exposure during the exchange process, and associated time delays to complete the procedure (Prior 1995). Compliance with the Guidelines is monitored but practically not enforced for vessel traffic frequenting ports within the Lower St. Lawrence Estuary such as sept-Îles and Port-Cartier on the Québec north shore because of the aforementioned safety issues (C. Wiley, pers. comm.).

3.3 PACIFIC REGION

Other than the voluntary international guidelines adopted by the IMO, there are no specific regulations or guidelines for the management of ballast water along the Pacific coast. However, the 1992 Environmental Cooperation Agreement between Washington State and British Columbia (B.C.) called for an increase in the sharing of information and the initiation of joint monitoring and research, resulting in the formation of the British Columbia/Washington Joint Environmental Council. Under its auspices, a Marine Science Panel reviewed issues of concern in the shared waters of Puget Sound and the Georgia Basin. As a result of the Panel's recommendations, the Puget SoundIGeorgia Basin International Task Force was established to develop strategies to address the principal environmental concerns in the shared waters, including minimizing the introduction of nonindigenous species.

In 1995, parallel working groups were estabiished in B.C. and Washington to 1) review the current status and management actions concerning exotic species already introduced in the shared waters; 2) to examine the routes and risks of new introductions; 3) to assess the practicality of control measures against potential new introductions; 4) to hold a syrnposium/workshop to seek solutions; and 5) to develop a cooperative strategy for dealing with exotic species and their long-term management in the shared waters.

The B.C. Working Group includes representatives from Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, the B.C. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, the Port of Vancouver, aquaculture industry associations for both salmon and shellfish growers, and academic scientists from the University of British Columbia and the University of Victoria.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the U.S. Environmental Protection Administration have jointly funded a review of pathways and mechanisms in place or required to address the problem. This includes reviewing the nature and background of potential pathways or vectors, specific nonindigenous species pathways into the shared waters, and present or required management strategies for the pathway. The report will also review selected introduced species in the region with respect to their timing, mode and location of entry, as far as is known, and their ecological and economic impact.

In March 1996, a workshop fùnded by Fisheries and Oceans Canada and coordinated by the University of Victoria was held to review B.C. biodiversity, ecological characteristics of invaders and their target habitats, susceptibility of B.C. marine communities to invasion, and a variety of management and regulatory options (Turncliffe 1996).

The goal of these activities is to develop a set of complementary policy recommendations for B.C. and Washington, for presentation to the Joint Environmental Council in late 1996. In addition, a number of immediate steps, such as developing educational material, may be undertaken in the interim.

4.0 SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIES IN CANADA

4.1 STUDIES ON THE INTRODUCTION OF SPECIES

For the Great Lakes basin, Mills et al. (1993b) have estimated that 139 nonindigenous species have become established since 1810; of these, 40% became established after 1950. and approximately 10% have had significant impacts, such as the sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) and the zebra musse1 (Dreissenapolymorpha) (Leach et al. 1995). Since the 1980ts, other species, such as the European ruffe (Gymnocephalus cernuus), spiny water flea (Bythotrephes cederstroemi) and the tubenose goby (Proterorphinus marmoratus) have also become successfully established with observable ecological and economic consequences (Mills et al. 1993b, Leach 1995) (Table 2). Although the suspected species have been identified on the basis of inferential knowledge, no organism has been unequivocally confirmed as having been introduced directly via ballast water.

Native to the Atlantic Ocean, the sea lamprey invaded the upper Great Lakes in the 1930ts, possibly via migration through the shipping route of the Welland Canal, and quickly parasitized and devasted local commercial fish stocks. Although not resulting from deballasting activities, this event is of note because it was one of the first biologically and economically significant appearances by a non-native species as a result of shipping activities. Furthermore, this resulted in the formation of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission designated to monitor subsequent species invasions and their impact on local fisheries. Despite expenditures by the Great Lakes Fishery Commission on research, chemical control and habitat modification - $1 68 millions in 1993 -, an estimated population of 575,000 adult sea lampreys is presently established in the five Great Lakes (Leach 1995).

The Eurasian zebra musse1 has also become successfully established in al1 five of the Great Lakes and connecting watenvays, including the lower Hudson and Mississippi Rivers, mainly as a result of this species' high fecundity, free-swimming larval stage and tenacious "holdfast" in adult mussels. A second non-native and related species of mussel, the quagga musse1 (Dreissena bugensis), has also been found in two locations in Lake Erie (Kelly 1992, Mills et al. 1994), and it is possible that both species could expand their ranges into the St. Lawrence Estuary. A description of the biology, ecology, distribution and impacts of both species is provided by Schloesser (1 995). Their predicted combined ecological impacts on resident biota is extensive and calculated costs associated with the population control and cleaning of fouled surfaces and intake waterpipes has been estimated to be up to 5 billion dollars by the year 2000 (Fifth International Zebra Musse1 Conference 1995).

The European ruffe, a fish native to fresh and brackish Eurasian lakes and rivers, is an ecological and economic threat to the native yellow perch (Percaflavescens) and other fisheries of the Great Lakes (Pratt et al. 1992). This species was first discovered in Duluth Harbour on Lake Superior in 1986 and speculated as being introduced by the discharge of ballast water from an ocean-going freighter in the early 1980's. It has rapidly spread to several estuaries along the south shore of Lake Superior and in 1991, seven ruffe were collected in Thunder Bay, Ontario, 300 km to the northeast

Table 2. Examples of suspected ballast-water mediated introductions.

Species Origiii I i~vaded areas First sighting

Fis11

II Tubenose goby (Prüerorhinris tnartnoratrrs) Eurasia St. Clair River, Great Lakes 1990's

II Eiiropean flounder (Plafich<hys/leszrs) Europe Lake Erie 1974

II Fourspine stickleback (Apelfes qtradracir.~) Atlantic Great Lakes 1986

II Tlireespine stickleback (Gasferosferrs aczr1ea~zi.s) Atlantic Great Lakes 1987

II Round goby (Neogobioirs t~ielanosfoiizris) Eurasia St. Clair River, Great Lakeç 1990

II Ruffe (Gytnnocephcrlus cernzrru) Eurasia Lake Stiperior 1986

1) Chinese rnitten crab (Biochier sinansis) Asia Great Lakes 1994

Il Calanoid copepod (Errrytemora affinis) N. American Atlantic Great Lakes or W. European coasts

II Garnrnarid amphipod (Gatiirnarss fasciat~is) Atlantic Great Lakes 1940

II Water flea (Erlbostnina coregoni) Eurasia Great Lakes

II Spiny water flea (Bythofrephes cederstroeiizi) Europe Great Lakes 1980's

II Quagga miissel (Dreissena bugensis) Europe Lake Erie 1989 to 1994 II Zebra iiiussel (Dreissenapol~n~orpha) Europe Great Lakes and tributaries 1988

II European valve snail (Valvafa piscinalis) Eurasia Great Lakes 1897

11 Faucet snail (Bithynia fenfaczrlata) Eurasia Great Lakes 1871

II Greater European pea clan1 (Pisidiriin aiunicunz) Eurasia Great Lakes 1897

II Oilier 111 vertebrntes

II Oligochaete (Ripistes parasita) Eurasia Great Lakes 1980

II Oligocliaete (Phallodrilzn aquaedzrlcis) Eiirasia Great Lakes 1983

Il Flatworrn (D~rgesia polychroa) Eurasia Great Lakes 1968

Modified froin MiIIs et al. (1993b) aiid Chesapeake Bay Cominission (1995).

of its initial sighting, probably transported there in ballast water from the St. Louis River. the westernmost tributary of Lake Superior (Busiahn and McClain 1995).

A few miscellaneouscaptures of species have also been recorded in the Great Lakes, and based on their country of origin, are most likely a result of ballast water discharges. Once again. in 1994. juvenile specimens of Chinese mitten crabs (Eriochier sinensis) and European flounder (Platichthysflesus), previously caught in 1974 and 1976 in Lake Erie (Emery and Teleki 1978). were reported in the Great Lakes (Leach et al. 1995). Mills et al. (1994) published a synopsis of the invasion history and impacts of exotic species into the Great Lakes, and exarnined the prospects for future invasions.

Another example of possible introductions via ballast water discharges is the capture of a Iish from the Family Batrachoididae, the oyster toadfish (Opsanus tau), by a fisherman on May 15, 1994 in the fresh waters of Lac Saint-François, in baie de Perron, near the village of Cazaville, upstream of Montréal. The identification has been confirmed by L. Bossé from DFO, Maurice Lamontagne Institute and by Dr. G. Crossman of the Royal Ontario Museum, and is the first report of this species in Canadian waters. The distribution area of this euryhaline species ranges from Massachusetts to Florida, mainly throughout Chesapeake Bay, except fresher waters, and Atlantic coasts of Virginia, Maryland and New Jersey. This species is considered as marine, although it can be found in salinities ranging from O to 34.2 ppt (Martin and ~ r e w r y 1978).

A number of studies in Canada have shown that viable phytoplankton cells and cysts are contained in ballast water and sediment. From May to September 1992, 62% of 60 ballast water samples taken from ships docked at Îles-de-la-~adeleine carried small concentrations of four potentially toxic dinoflagellates, Alexandrium spp. and three Dinophysis spp. (Gosselin et al. 1995). Eight of nine sediment samples collected from the ballast tanks of three ships contained resting cysts of Alexandrium spp. (Roy 1994). In their study to inventory type and abundance of potentially toxic phytoplankton species, Subba Rao et al. (1994) examined ballast water samples collected by Locke et al. (1 991) from 86 ocean-going foreign vessels bound for the Great Lakes and upper St. Lawrence River during the period of May to December 1990 and March to May 199 1. A variety of organisms were found, including 69 diatom and 30 dinoflagellate species, several for the first time in Canadian waters. Of these, Pseudonitzschia pungens and Dinophysis acuminata are toxigenic and have occurred in bloom proportions on Canada's east Coast.

Although phytoplankton sampling in Atlantic Canada has shown that the frequency of toxic algal blooms in and around Nova Scotia during summer months has tripled over the past 15 years, a definitive connection with ballast water releases has yet to be established (Smith and Kerr 1992). The hypothesis of whether or not such blooms occur more frequently in coastal sites that receive ballast water discharges has yet to be tested (Subba Rao et al. 1994) and the level of risk of introduction also remains unquantified (Forbes 1994).

In British Columbia, unintentional introductions that have induced significant ecosystem or economic effects include the parasitic copepod kfytilieola orientalis, several species of oyster drill, marine wood borers, including Limnoria tripunetata and Teredo navalis, the brown alga Sargassum

muticum, the soft-shell clam m a arenaria and the seagrass Zostera japonica (Quayle 1964, t

Harrison and Bigley 1982, Waldichuck et al. 1994). However, the introduction of each of the aforementioned species has been attributed to import for various aquaculture activities (R. Forbes, pers. comm.).

Several other organisms are recent introductions in Pacific waters, such as the varnish clam (Nutallia obscurata). Others are considered likely candidates as a result of recent establishment in adjacent U.S. coastal waters, such as the asian calanoid copepod (Pseudodiaptomus inopinus) and the Asian brackish-water clam (Potamocorbula amurensis) (R.C. Wilson and R. Forbes, pers. comm.). The European green crab (Carcinus maenas) has recently become successfully established in San Fransisco Bay (Cohen et al. 1995, Grosholz and Ruiz 1995). Considering the extensive ballast water-carrying vessel traffic along the B.C. coast between the Puget SoundIStrait of Georgia complex and this Bay, this crustacean is another species likely to be introduced into Pacific Canadian waters in the near future. Ecological and economic implications are potentially significant as this would be the first large predator species to be introduced into Canadian West coast waters (G. Jamieson, pers. comm.)

4.2 OTHER STUDIES

In 1980, Environment Canada commissioned Bio-Environmental Services Ltd (1 98 1) to conduct the first study on ballast water in Canada. Sampling of ballast water in 55 ships from 10 worldwide locations entering the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence system revealed that al1 contained viable aquatic organisms and even raw sewage in one instance. Over 150 phytoplankton species and 56 invertebrates were identified. Although not identified in the samples, this study was the first to suggest the zebra musse1 (Dreissenapolymorpha) as a potential invader to the Great Lakes as a result of ballast water discharges.

About a decade later, two workshops were held concerning the introduction of nonindigenous species by ship-transported ballast water respectively in Atlantic Canada and in the Great Lakes. In April 1990, a workshop entitled "The Risk to Canada's Marine Resources of Species Carried in Ship's Ballast Waters" was sponsored by DFO and held at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography in Halifax (Smith and Ken 1992). Recommendations from the workshop included the need to: 1) identifj organisms entering Canada's Atlantic coastal waters; 2) determine the suitability of the Gulf of St. Lawrence as a ballast exchange zone; and 3) identifi sources and volumes of ballast water from the data on vessel traffic. Other recommendations were to develop a list of high risk species, the role of anchor chain lockers in introducing species, access for sampling purposes, treatment methods, harmonization with U.S. policies, extension of the ballast exchange zone beyond the EEZ limit, and education prograrns.

In October 1991, the Great Lakes Fishery Commission also convened a workshop entitled "What's Next? The Prediction and Management of Exotic Species in the Great Lakes" (Mills et al. 1993a). Essentially, the participants concluded that as long as the Great Lakes were inoculated with exotic species, new species will establish. They recommended that controls on ballast water discharges

be extended to include the entire North American continent and that a public education program and an information exchange network be developed while initiating research studies.

At the request of the Canadian Coast Guard, Pollutech Environmental Limited (1 992) conducted a review of ballast water management and treatment options to reduce the potential for the introduction of non-native species to the Great Lakes. The study covered control, management and treatment options, and provided supporting documentation of the abiotic and biotic characteristics of ballast water. Each treatment option was ranked in regards to cost, effectiveness, safety concerns and environmental acceptability, the results of which favored physical measures such as mid-ocean exchange or discharges to a shore-based treatment facility over chemical treatments. The authors concluded that a comprehensive characterization of ballast waters and sediments was not yet available. In addition, because of the variety of organisms and life stages found in ballast waters and sediments even the most effective control measure may never achieve 100% success in eliminating the risk of exotic species introduction (Pollutech Environmental Limited 1992).

In order to examine the extent of compliance with the voluntary ballast water exchange guidelines. Locke et al. (1991) sampled the ballast tanks of 455 ocean-going foreign vessels entering the St. Lawrence Seaway. Based on information from the 90% of vessels who submitted Ballast Water Exchange Reports to the Canadian Coast Guard and St. Lawrence Seaway Authority. 89% of vessels carrying ballast water conducted exchange procedures as per the voluntary guidelines. In a subsequent paper, Locke et al. (1993) calculated the effectiveness of ballast water exchange by examining the living zooplankton in the ballast water carried by 24 vessels originating in fresh or brackish ports, having reported saltwater ballast exchange and proceeding up the Seaway. The authors calculated that ballast water exchange was 67% effective - 16 of 24 vessels - in eliminating al1 living freshwater-tolerant zooplankton. However, they also doncluded that the effectiveness of ballast water exchange was limited by the possible resuspension of organisms carried in residuaI water or bottom sediments, which could be potentially available for discharge in subsequent ports of call.

In other respects, a brief review of the Canadian and international situation regarding ship- transported ballast water begun in 1994 and was recently published by Hall-Armstrong (1 996).

On the Pacific coast, the American Association for the Advancement of Science - Pacific Division met in June 1995 at the University of British Columbia to discuss "Shipping-Associated Introductions of Exotic Marine Organisms into the Pacific Northwest: How Serious is the Problem?". Presentation topics included marine exotics and the shellfish industry of British Columbia, the introduction of seaweeds, the asian calanoid copepod Pseudodiaptornus inopinus and harmfiil marine phytoplankton species by ballast water, interactions of an introduced seagrass and the native eelgrass, and a risk assessment of-the introduction of non-native organisms to Pacific northwest ports. From a review of the presented papers, there is active concern that B.C. fisheries and aquaculture will be threatened by the introduction of exotic organisms via ballast water discharges. While the impact of algal introductions along the West coast appears to have been minimal, more detailed distributions of marine phytoplankton and benthic microalgae are required in combination with regional population genetics, in order to fully evaluate the potential effects of viable phytoplankton spores from ballast waters.

4.3 ONGOING AND PROPOSED RESEARCH

Phase 1 of an ongoing project being conducted by the Canadian Coast Guard (Prior 1995) aims at validating and quantieing the concerns regarding the safety aspects of mid-ocean ballast water exchange such as hull stresses and loss of stability. The results of a study on two typical bulk carriers transiting the Laurentian Trough, showed that both ships would be unable to comply with the mid-ocean Voluntary Ballast Water Exchange Guidelines because, in one case, of bending moment limitations and, in the other case, of shear forces limitations. Safety concerns due to stability was not an issue for either ship because both met al1 relevant stability criteria during the ballast exchange operation. However, changes in forward and aft drafts produced several instances of propeller emergence as well as increased risk of forward slarnrning (Prior 1995). Subsequent phases of this study will involve investigating different initial ballasting conditions.

Initiated in 1993 at DFO's Maurice Lamontagne Institute in Mont-Joli, Québec, an ongoing study by the Sciences of the Marine Environment Division aims at: 1) identifjing species of organisms which may be considered to be high risk potential invaders of the St. Lawrence Gulf and Estuary; 2) describing maritime traffic patterns and current ballast water management practices; and 3) sampling of approximately 100 vessels entering ports of the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

In October 1995, the Canadian Coast Guard also contracted out two studies, the first of which focuses on the effectiveness of the Voluntary Guidelines and U.S. Regulations for the control of ballast water for ships proceeding to the Great Lakes. The other study focuses on the economic impact of a no discharge regime in the Great Lakes (C. Wiley, pers. comm.).

On the Pacific Coast, the British Columbia and Washington Working Groups on Minimizing the Introduction of Exotic Species, hope to produce by July 1996, a report describing introduced species in the inland waters of Washington State and British Columbia, with policy recommendationson minimizing the risk of potential future introductions and responses to already introduced exotic organisms. At the Institute of Ocean Sciences (IOS), in Sidney, some work has begun concerning ballast water-mediated introductions; scientists are conducting a review of existing information regarding known introduced non-native organisms into the Strait of GeorgiafPuget Sound system, the possible impacts and the identification of applicable legislation and responsible agencies, and the sampling of ballast tanks and fouling communities on ships' hulls from vessels arriving in the major B.C. ports of Nanaimo, Vancouver, New Westminster and Prince Rupert. This is also a priority of the British Columbia/Washington State Joint Environmental Council.

5.0 THE INTERNATIONAL SITUATION

Although ballast water had been suggested by Ostenfeld in 1908 as a transfer vector of aquatic organisms (reviewed in Carlton 1985), international recognition of the problem has only occurred within the past twenty years. In 1973, the issue appeared for the first time on the agenda of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), a United Nations agency with jurisdiction on maritime affairs. During preparation of the International Convention for the Prevention of

Pollution from Ships MARPOL 73/78, Resolution 18 called upon the World Health Organization (WHO), in collaboration with the IMO, to carry out research into the role of ballast water as a medium for the spreading of epidemic disease bacteria. However, this research seems to have never been undertaken (Kelly 1992).

On July 4, 1988, at the 26th meeting of the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) of the IMO, Canada presented a scientific study (Bio-Environmental Services 1981) which, in the view of the Committe, concluded that "organisms are alive in ship ballast water when it is discharged". The Canadian delegation's reason for presenting the report was its concern about "several new predator species of fish which had caused great alarm in fisheries circles" (Kelly 1992).

At the next meeting, the Canadian delegation informed the Committe that three introduced species were presenting particular problems: the European ruffe (Gymnocephalus cernuus), the spiny water flea (Bythotrephus cederstroemi) and the zebra musse1 (Dreissenapolymorpha). Soon afier, Australia identified Japanese woodchip carriers as the possible link between the toxic phytoplankton blooms in Tasmania and their presence in Japanese ports of origin (Kelly 1992). Responding to pressure from Canada and Australia, the MEPC instructed an informa1 Ballast Water Working Group to consider the extent of the problem of exotic species transfer via ships' ballast water along with possible control actions. The Working Group agreed that the establishment of voluntary guidelines was an appropriate first step in addressing the problem.

On July 4, 1991, the MEPC adopted the voluntary International Guidelines for Preventing the Introduction of Unwanted Aquatic Organisms and Pathogens ji-om Ships' Ballast Water and Sediment Discharges, which were based on national control measures recently put in place in Australia, Canada and the United States (Nauke 1995). Their goal was to provide Administrations and Port State Authorities with guidance and procedures to minimize the risk of introduction of unwanted aquatic organisms and pathogens from ships' ballast water and sediment. Important operational provisions of these Guidelines were:

- to avoid taking on ballast water -in shallow areas, where the water is turbid or aquatic organisms and pathogens are present in the water, such as areas of known outbreak of diseases or phytoplankton blooms;

- that vessels keep accurate ballast records; - to exchange ballast water in deep ocean areas; and - routine cleaning of the anchors, cables and chain lockers, and the discharge of ballast tank

sediments in a manner and area approved of by the port of destination.

In 1992, the United Nations Conference on Environn~ent and Developii~ent (UNCED) requested iri its Agenda 21, Chapter 21 on the Protection of the Oceans and Al1 Kinds of Seas, that the IMO consider "the adoption of appropriate rules on ballast water discharge to prevent the spread of nonindigenous organisms" (Nauke 1995).

Based on the work of an informa1 committee formed upon the request of Australia during the 33rd meeting of the MEPC, the Committee decided to form an intersessional correspondance group led

by Australia. The goal of this group was to conduct a survey of IMO Member Countries on the implementation of the Guidelines, research activities, availability of information, and technologies. At the 34th meeting of the MEPC, in July 1993, when the correspondance group becarne formally the Ballast Water Working Group, the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service tabled a report entitled: "International Survey of IMO Member States Relating to Ships Ballast Water" (AQIS 1993a). Based on the response of only thirteen Member Countries, the survey results revealed the following:

- the Guidelines have so far been implemented in only a few IMO Member Countries; - half of the respondents had undertaken some research into the ballast water issue which was

likely to continue over the next 12 months; - the IMO should continue to liaise with Member States in disseminating information on

research, toxic algal blooms, new technology and public awareness material; and - currently, there is no cost effective, technically sound, practical, safe and environmentally

acceptable treatment for ballast waters.

Upon consideration of UNCED's request, the MEPC then concluded that, for the time being, the Guidelines should remain voluntary in view of the lack of any major advance in ballast water management techniques and treatment methods. However, lack of implementation of the Guidelines by the Member States led the MEPC to recomrnend that the IMO adopt the Guidelines by Resolution.

On November 4, 1993, the IMO adopted resolution A.774(18) by which it:

- recognized "that the discharge of ballast water and sediment has led to unplanned and unwanted introductions of harmful aquatic organisms, disease bacteria and viruses that are known to have caused injury to public health and property, and to the environment";

- noted that "the uncontrolled discharge of ballast water containing harmful aquatic organisms not only remains a major international problem but is one which is expected to worsen";

- adopted the Guidelines for Preventing the Introduction of Unwanted Aquatic Organisms and Pathogens fiom Ships' Ballasr Water and Sediment Discharges;

- requested the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) to consider safety aspects of the Guidelines, particularly with regard to vesse1 stability and structural integrity;

- requested the MEPC and the MSC to keep the ballast water issue and the application of the Guidelines under review for future development as a basis for a new Annex to MARPOL 73/78.

Canada participated in the 34th to 38'h MEPC meetings of the Ballast Water Working Group held frorrr 1 993 tu 1996 anrd was represented once by S. Gosselin, and three times by D. Gauthier of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), Maurice Lamontagne Institute in Mont-Joli, Québec, and once by Tom Morris of the Deartment of Transport, Marine Regulatory Directorate, Ottawa, Ontario.

At the 36th MEPC meeting, it still appeared that few Member States were implementing the Guidelines. As a result, the Committe decided to send a Circular Letter to al1 Member States

which reiterated the global importance of this issue and reconfirmed the necessity expressed by the IMO Assembly in 1993 for al1 governments to apply the Guidelines.

At MEPC's 37th session, in September 1995, the Ballast Water Working Group produced a first drafi of a set of legally binding regulations which could form a new Annex to MARPOL 73/78 together with "implementation guidelines" and a Ship Ballast Water Management Plan to be incorporated into each ship's safety manual. These Regulations contain provisions on general obligations, definitions, application, force majeure, exemptions/exceptions, recording and certification, operational and safety requirements and the role of national authorities. At MEPC 37 and for its next or four meetings - up until 1998 - the MEPC has assigned a high priority to the development of regulations on ballast water management, with the Working Group scheduled to table a final draft of these to the Committee in October 1997. A final draft of new Ballast Water Management Guidelines - the implementation guidelines - and an outline of Ships Ballast Water Management Plan are scheduled to be tabled at the 41 meeting of the MEPC, in 1998 (MEPC 1996).

The issue of the introduction of nonindigenous species via ballast water has been on the agenda of the ICES Working Group on Introductions and Transfers of Marine Organisms (WGITMO) since 1988. Having recognized the existence of the problem and the need for action, the WGITMO recommended that member countries undertake research activities, develop ballast water management guidelines and educational programs to inform the shipping industry and the public. At its most recent meeting, held April 10th to the 13th, 1995, in Kiel, Germany, the WGITMO heard reports from ICES Member Countries on species introductions and ballast water activities, research and management. Dr. D. Kieser, of DFO's Pacific Biological Station in Nanaimo, British Columbia, was the Canadian representative. The Working Group recommended the further strengthening of cooperation on ballast water issues between relevant groups within ICES, the IOC-FA0 Panel on Harmful Algal Blooms, and MEPC's Ballast Water Working Group (WGITMO 1995).

The first international scientific conference on this issue was held on September 2 1, at the 1995 ICES Annual Science Conference - 83rd Statutory Meeting - in Aalborg, Denmark, under a special theme session entitled "Ballast water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications". Scientists from Australia presented a preliminary transport mode1 of toxic dinoflagellates in ballast water (Hallegraeff 1995); the programme of the new Center for research on introduced marine pests (Thresher and Martin 1995); and shipping industry-developed ballast water management measures (Rigby and Taylor 1995). The U.S. presented their Aquatic Nuisance Species Program (Gaudiosi 1995); the research program in the Chesapeake Bay (Ruiz et al. 1995); and cosubenefit modelling of different options of ballast water management (Gollamudi and Randall 1995). Scientists from the U.K. presented preliminary results of ballast water and sediment sampling in Scottish ports (Macdonald 1995); estimation of annual ballast water discharges in ports of England and Wales (Laing 1995); and some methods to assess the ecological risk of the introductions of organisms by ballast water (Hayes 1995). Germany presented results from ballast water sampling (Gollasch et al. 1995) as well as their concerns regarding potential conflicts between ballast water and mariculture in coastal areas. A synopsis of the Canadian situation regarding ship-transported ballast water was presented in the form of a poster by Gauthier and Steel (1995) which comes

from the initial sections of this report. These papers should be published in 1996 as a special ICES Cooperative Research Report, with Dr. J.T. Carlton, Chairman of the session, serving as the editor.

5.1 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

On August 25, 1990, the Executive Committee of the American Fisheries Society (AFS) adopted a draft position statement - that later becarne final without change - on ballast water-mediated introductions (Arnerican Fisheries Society 1991). Recognizing the impacts on aquatic ecosystems and fisheries, the AFS called for action and coordination with U.S. Congress and other national and international bodies such as IMO, F A 0 and ICES to address the problem.

The magnitude of the ballast water problem in American coastal waters is exemplified by the work of Carlton et al. (1995) who have estimated that nearly 79 million tonnes total volume of ballast waters arrive from foreign ports and are discharged into U.S. coastal waters on a yearly basis.

5.1.1. Regulatory aspects and management activities

Under Section 207 of the United States Public Law 101-225, the Great Lakes Exotic Species Prevention Act of 1989, the Congress directed the U.S. Coast Guard to report on methods for preventing the introductionsof non-native species into U.S. waters by ballast discharge, with open ocean exchange considered the most feasible method (Stanley et al. 1991).

On November 29, 1990, the U.S. Congress passed the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act which required the U.S. Coast Guard to issue voluntary guidelines concerning ballast water management within six months and to convert these into regulations within two years. The Act also established a National Ballast Water Control Program and created a Task Force to develop and implement the regulations and an Aquatic Nuisance Species Program. In March 1991, in accordance with the Act, the Canadian and U.S. Coast Guards jointly issued guidelines very similar to those implemented by Canada since May 1989.

The regulations required under the Act were developed by the Secretary of Transportation in consultation with a Task Force CO-chaired by the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, and consisting of representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Coast Guard (Department of Transportation 1993), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Army Corps oîErigirieers, the Departmeilt of Agriculture and the Department of State (NOAA 1993).

On May 10, 1993, the Regulations on Ballast Water Management For Vessels Entering the Great Lakes came into effect, thus making the United States the first and, presently, the only country with active enforceable legislation specifically related to ballast water discharges. These apply to al1 vessels entering a U.S. port on the Great Lakes after operating on the waters beyond the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of both the U.S. and Canada. As al1 vessels entering the Great

Lakes must pass through the Snell Lock. located in Massena, New York, which is the first U.S. port of the Great Lakes and where the Regulations are enforced, the Act applies in effect to al1 vessels entering the Canadian waters of the Great Lakes as well. While focussing on international traffic, these regulations do not apply to the domestic traffic of either country. As part of the Oceans Act of 1992, Congress arnended the Nonindigenous Aquaric Nuisance Prevenrion and Control Act of 1990 to extend its application to vessels entering a U.S. port on the Hudson River above the George Washington Bridge (Chesapeake Bay Commission 1995).

According to the Regulations, the master of each vessel, prior to entering the Great Lakes, must conduct one of the following ballast water management practices:

- exchange ballast water beyond the EEZ - of both Canada and the U.S. - and in waters of the open ocean, in depths greater than 2,000 m, such that the salinity of the ballast water is at least 30 ppt;

- retain the vessel's ballast water, in which case the port authority of Massena may seal any tank for the duration of the voyage in the Great Lakes;

- use a U.S. Coast Guard approved alternative which is environmentally sound, such as returning to sea or to an area agreed to by the port authority to exchange the ballast water or conducting another procedure to ensure the prevention of nonindigenous species introductions into the Great Lakes via ballast water discharges.

For vessels travelling inbound through the Snell Lock, records and salinity of ballast water are checked to veri& that the required exchange has occurred. On their way out of the Great Lakes, vessels which had opted to have their tanks sealed upon entry, may be reboarded for verification of seals, water levels and salinity. Sediments from ballast tanks must be disposed of at a designated onshore facility. Any person who violates the regulations shall be liable for a maximum civil penalty of $ 25,000 U.S. per day or, if done knowingly, guilty of a class C felony which entails a maximum of 12 years in prison and a maximum fine of $ 250,000 U.S. for an individual or $ 500,000 U.S. for an organization (Department of Transportation 1993).

Under Section 11 02 of the Act, which is the National Ballast Water Control Program, the Task Force was also required to develop and implement an Aquatic Nuisance Species Program, which builds upon existing activities and a cooperative effort among federal agencies, States, tribes. local govemments, nongovermnental entities and foreign governrnents (NOAA 1993). Essentially, the Program included nonindigenous species research, species-specific control programs, technical assistance and education programs. Other components include an Intentional Introduction Policy Review, State Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plans and Grants Program, and a National Ballast Water Control Prograrn and Study comprising three major research studies (NOAA 1993). These are: 1) a Biological Study to determine whether aquatic nuisance species threaten the ecological characteristics and economic uses of waters other than the Great Lakes; 2) a Ballast Exchange Study to assess the environmental effects of ballast water exchange in U.S. waters and identifi areas, if any, where the exchange of ballast water does not pose a threat; and 3) a National Biological Invasion Shipping Study (NABISS) to analyze current shipping practices and need for controls. Results to date include: 1) the development by the U.S. Coast Guard of a Ballast Exchange Education Program which provides mariners, marine managers, the maritime support

community and enforcement officers with applicable ballast water information and potential solutions (United States Coast Guard 1993); 2) the development of two species-specific control programs - e.g. the Great Lakes Maritime Industry Voluntary Ballast Water Management Plan for the Control of Ruffe in Lake Superior Ports and a Zebra Musse1 Containment Protocol; 3 ) the publication by Carlton et al. (1995) of the National Biological Invasion Shipping Study (NABISS).

The Great Lakes Maritime Industry Voluntary Ballast Water Management Plan for the Control of Ruffe in Lake Superior Ports, implemented in 1995, was developed jointly by the Task Force and the Canadian Coast Guard, the Shipping Federation of Canada, the Canadian Shipowners Association, the Lake Carriers' Association, the Thunder Bay Harbour Commission, the Seaway Port Authority of Duluth and the U.S. Great Lakes Shipping Association. These guidelines request that ships taking on ballast water from mffe-inhabited ports to exchange ballast waters in the deep waters of Lake Superior, West of a demarcation line drawn between a point one mile east of Ontonagan, Michigan, and Grand Portage, Minnesota. Ballast water from these harbours must not be pumped out within 9 km of the south shore of Lake Superior while west of this demarcation line and should be undertaken in locations with water at least 37 m deep. If ballast exchange is not completed by the time vessels reach the demarcation line, exchange may only be conducted in waters at least 73 m deep and 28 km from shore. In al1 cases, the exchange must be terminated before proceeding east of 86" W. Both the U.S. and Canadian Coast Guards have access to ships ballasting records to monitor compliance with the Plan (Busiahn and McClain 1995). These guidelines are the only measure to prevent inter-basin transfer of species by domestic traffic.

In spite of these measures, mffe were reported in Lake Huron in August 1995 (T. Busiahn, pers. comm.) This prompted a special meeting of the GLFC's Council of Lake Committees (CLC) on November 8, 1995 in Detroit, Michigan, with the goal of recommending changes to the U.S. Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force's Ruffe Control Program. The Committee, consisting of fishery management officials from the eight Great Lakes States, the Province of Ontario and two intertribal agencies, wants to place primary emphasis on containing ruffe within the Great Lakes. The CLC adopted three broad objectives: 1) prevent invasions of new species into the Great Lakes; 2) contain ruffe to the Great Lakes; and 3) continue to slow the spread of ruffe within the Great Lakes. The CLC recommends notably, that: 1) chemical controls are not used; 2) ballast water management plans be revised to include affected Lake Huron ports; 3) research focus on evaluating the impact of mffe on fish communities; and 4) development of a public education program. The Ruffe Control Comrnittee of the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force subsequently met to discuss the results of the CLC meeting. Agreeing with their findings, this Committee decided to update the Ruffe Control Program (T. Busiahn, pers. comm.).

The U.S. Navy has also adopted-procedures for the management of ship-transported ballast water and of sediments retained in the anchor chain locker that are modelled after the IMO Guidelines and apply to U.S. naval vessels travelling world-wide (Chesapeake Bay Commission 1995).

In March 1994, the House passed a Ballast Wuter Management Act that amended the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 by authorizing a feasibility study to identiQ and evaluate promising ballast water management technologies and practices. It

also called for a project in publiclprivate partnership to demonstrate proposed technologies and practices aboard ocean-going vessels in al1 major coastal systems of the U.S. The Senate version of the bill, the Innovative Ballast Water Management Act, failed to pass in 1994 and 1995 (WGITMO 1995).

In response to a request from the Task Force and pending the approval by Congress, the National Research Council (NRC) initiated a study to recommend regulatory and technological approaches in a regional, national and international context (Chesapeake Bay Commission 1995). To complement the "Shipping Study", the NRC1s Marine Board formed a Committee on Ship's Ballast Operations to formulate recommendations on several available treatment technologies. Representatives from the shipping industry, waste water treatment engineers, naval architects and biologists will produce a book - expected to be available in September 1996 - that provides an overview of ballast water concems and a study of existing technologies for possible treatments. The Committee met for the first time in 1994 and a fourth and final meeting was to be held in December 1995 in Washington, D.C. (WGITMO 1995).

At the State level, the States of Washington, California, Hawaii and Alaska have also sought to pass their own legislations or resolutions in an attempt to extend the presently geographically limited regulations regarding ballast water discharges. However, none have met with success, either because of resistance in their own legislatures or anticipated legal challenges (Chesapeake Bay Commission 1995). For example, in 1992, Califomia enacted a bill directing the State's Department of Fish and Game to adopt the IMO Guidelines as state policy. In 1994, promulgation of the bill ceased because states currently lack the constitutional authority to affect trade and because the IMO Guidelines must be administered by a "port state authority" which is the U.S. Coast Guard. Although Alaska, Washington and California have ail tumed to the U.S. Coast Guard, the latter has no authority to promulgate regulations in any region of the country other than the Great Lakes and Hudson River. Thus, state actions are limited to largely voluntary measures (Chesapeake Bay Commission 1995). Nevertheless, the States continue to voice the need for federal legislation extending Coast Guard authority, as exemplified by New York State in the "Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Comprehensive Management Plan" it adopted on November 10, 1993 (Chesapeake Bay Commission 1995).

Carlton et al. (1 995) have identified the Chesapeake Bay as one of the most problematic areas of the U.S. with regards to the potential introduction of nonindigenous species by ship-transported ballast water, which explains why the bay is the focus of many initiatives. The Chesapeake Bay Commission, a tri-state legislative body serving the governments of the States of Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania, was formed in 1980 to foster inter-state cooperation regarding the restoration and management of ecological resources in Chesapeake Bay. In 1992, this Commission adopted the Chesapeake Bay Pi-ograrri Policy for the I~itroductioii of Noniiidigenous Aquatic Species and created a Ballast Water Working Group which produced a report entitled: "The Introduction of Nonindigenous Species to the Chesapeake Bay via Ballast Water (Chesapeake Bay Commission 1995). Although the two important ports of Chesapeake Bay, Norfolk and Baltimore, annually receive 9.3 million and 2.8 million tonnes of ballast water respectively, originating from 48 different foreign ports (Carlton et al. 1995), there are presently no laws specifically concerning ballast water in Chesapeake Bay. The Working Group has formulated recommendations

essentially calling for member States to: support the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990, which is currently being introduced to Congress for its quinquennial reauthorization; request the extension of Coast Guard regulatory authority; request an increased federal involvement in the development of ballast water management technologies, practices and guidelines at the national and international levels; launch an education campaign aimed at the crews and agents of ships, as well as regional governmental and non-governmental organizations; and to cooperate with authorities in other mid-Atlantic States and with the national and international comrnunity (Chesapeake Bay Commission 1 995).

Current ship designs result in a residual amount of ballast water and deposited sediment in the tanks, even after a complete discharge, both of which oflen contain a high nurnber of organisms that survive in a dormant stage. In assessing the protection provided to the Great Lakes by the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990, Weathers and Reeves (1995) identify this as being a potentially significant gap in management practices since approximately 95% of the vessels entering the Great Lakes each year cany unpumpable ballast water residue and sediment.

As Congress prepares to reauthorize the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and ControlAct of 1990, it faces pressure to broaden the prevention program to include coastal waters in addition to the Great Lakes, while keeping the burdens of regulations to a minimum (Cangelosi 1995). Budgetary constraints preclude the extension of the National Ballast Water Control Program to al1 U.S. waters because the Coast Guard would have to monitor compliance with regulations in each port. The reauthorization proposa1 is expected to find a middle ground, emphasizing a voluntary approach but reserving some authority for the Coast Guard to promulgate the voluntary guidelines as regulations in coastal regions where voluntary compliance is lacking. Such an approach gives shippers and ports both the opportunity and incentive to cooperate with voluntary guidelines, while conserving Coast Guard resources for regions with special needs.

As of 1996, this Bill has been introduced in the House of Senate by its author, Senator John Glenn, under the new name of National Invasive Species Act of 1996 (NISA). Changes that are included in the NISA are: 1) the creation of a demonstration program for ballast water technologies; 2) the inclusion of a provision to incorporate ballast management procedures into naval operations; 3) the authorization of the national Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force to undertake ecological and ballast discharge surveys and to assess the risks and effects of invasions by nonindigenous species; 4) the creation of national voluntary guidelines for recreational boaters; and 5) the establishment of regional coordinating panels for other regions of the U.S. in addition to the Great Lakes (Cangelosi 1995).

5.1.2. Scientijc activities

An investigation of ballast water and sediments from bulk cargo carriers involved in the export of woodchips from Washington State to Japan by Kelly (1993) revealed the presence of viable organisms which survived the 1 1-1 5 day transoceanic voyage. The water samples contained live phytoplanctonand zooplankton including larval bivalves, gastropods, polychaetes and fish, as well as amphipods, isopods and copepods. The incubation of prepared sediments subsarnples resulted

in a proliferation of organisms, including pennate and centric diatoms, euglenoid flagellates. ciliates and dinoflagellates. These results corroborated the work of Australian researchers who have also suggested that the worldwide transport of encysted phytoplankton species in ballast water sediments may serve to seed viable populations in previously undocumented locations (Hallegraeffand Bolch 1991, 1992). In addition, McCarthy and Khambaty (1 994) documented the presence of toxigenic cholera, Vibrio cholerae, from ballast, bilge and sewage water on board five cargo ships that docked in ports of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico in 1991 and 1992.

In April 1993, N O M sponsored the first scientific workshop on Nonindigenous Estuarine and Marine Organisms ( N O M 1993). The objectives were to define the extent of understanding of the issue, to describe the pathways of invasion and dispersal, to assess current research, monitoring and control, and to identifi mitigation and response strategies. The major points the panelists agreed upon were that: 1) scientists underestimate the number and distribution of exotic estuarine and marine organisms throughout the world; 2) human aided transport has dramatically increased the amount of invasions; 3) many introduced species are misidentified as new species; 4) the three major pathways that currently account for the majority of introductions are ballast water, the aquarium industry and the aquaculture industry; 5) marine reserves and sanctuaries appear suitable for research and monitoring; and 6) once established, eradication of a species is very difficult.

Assessing the role of ship-transportedballast water in the introduction of nonindigenous species to the U.S., Carlton et al. (1995) list 57 species identified as probable or possible cases of introduction. In view of the aforementioned limitations, they consider this is a "significant underestimate". These species include representatives from the Coelenterata, Crustacea, Mollusca, Bryozoans, Chordata and various diatoms, dinoflagellates and macro-algal species.

A specific example is the recent discovery of a species of Gastropod native to New Zealand, Philine auriformis, in the San Francisco Bay, California, suggested as being introduced via releases of ballast water from international shipping (Gosliner 1995).

Under the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990, a National Biological Invasion Shipping Study WABISS) was undertaken to analyze shipping practices and possible controls (Carlton et al. 1995). In 199 1, twenty-two ports were visited along five of the six U.S. coastlines: Atlantic, Gulf, Pacific, Alaskan and Hawaiian - al1 except the Great Lakes. Key conclusions were that: 1) nearly 79 million tonnes of ballast waters from al1 regions of the world are discharged annually in U.S. coastal waters, of which 13 % are unacknowledged; 2) the last- port-of-cal1 is a poor indicator of ballast water source; 3) a total of 103 aquatic species are identified as having been introduced to or within the U.S., 57 of which have probably or possibly been introducedvia ballast water; 4) the examination of 32 control alternatives does not single out any as the most adequate but rather leads to the conclusion that only an integrated approach to ballast water management, using various combinations of alternatives, can effectively minimize the risk of introducing nonindigenous species to the United States. Major recommendations are: 1 ) to implement a National Ballast Water Management Program and a joint CanadaKJ.S. North American Ballast Water Management Program; 2) to increase the collection of data on ballast water transported by domestic and international vessels; 3) to undertake studies on international

trade routes and shipping patterns, hull fouling, full scale experimental trials of ballast water treatments and other alternatives, and on the role of military vessels in the transport of ballast water; 4) to implement merchant marine, industry and Coast Guard Academy educations programs; and 5) to support international cooperation.

In terms of ongoing research started under the NABISS, field and experimental work on ballast invasions in the United States continues with an extensive prograrn established at the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center (SERC) in Edgewater, Maryland, supported by a NOANSea Grant and the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Department of Defense, Smithsonian Institution and NATO. A case Biological Study has begun for vessels arriving in Chesapeake Bay, including analysis of water, sediments and microbial fauna in the ballast tanks, and examination of fauna attached to the hull. It is noteworthy that this study examines both the transferltransport and invasion processes. The sampling of 70 vessels revealed that over 90% carried live organisms in their ballast waters, including gastropods, copepods, diatoms and juvenile fish when arriving in Chesapeake Bay (WGITMO 1995) - presented in 1996 to U.S. Coast Guard by Smith et al. Data from Arnerican naval vessels have also been collected, focussing largely on the effectiveness of ballast water exchange (G. Ruiz, SERC, pers. comm.).

A related project, also sternrning from the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990, is currently in progress at the Center for Coastal Physical Oceanography (CCPO) of Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia. Through a cooperative prograrn with Williams College-Mystic Seaport, scientists are seeking to identi& near-shore backup exchange zones for vesse1 ballast waters. In addition, the study also seeks to identi& the potential impacts of releasing large volumes of salt water in freshwater environments, particularily in enclosed basins (WGITMO 1995).

In other respects, two major studies are undenvay that examine marine invasion impacts: the green crab (Carcinus maenas) is being studied in California and Massachusetts while the musse1 Muscalista senhousiz invasion is examined in San Diego (G.Ruiz, pers. comm.).

5.2 AUSTRALIA

With regards to the ballast water issue, Australia was one of the first and most active countries at the international level. The threat caused to Australia's fisheries and mariculture industries by the appearance of toxic dinoflagellates convinced the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS) that one could no longer wait for a scientific solution to the problem. Rather, immediate steps needed to be taken to minimize the risk and consequences while further research was undertaken (Paterson 1995). Upon representations from New Zealand, Australia, United States and Canada in 1990, the MEPC formed a Ballast Water Working Group to examine the problem of exotic species transfer via ships' ballast water, which led to the adoption of guidelines by the MEPC. Australia then conducted a survey of IMO Member Countries concerning their implementation of the Guidelines and research activities (AQIS 1993b) which highlighted the need for further international cooperation and action. Since this time, Australia has continuously been a major contributorto the activities of the Working Group and, mainly through the sharing of

the following information on ballast water management and research, to al1 countries involved as well.


As an island continent, shipping accounts for over 99% of Australia's international trade. In 199 1. the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS) estimated that 121 million tonnes of ballast water were discharged from over 4775 vessels arrivals in the country's 40 ports (Kerr 1994a). These vessels came from 300 ports in 53 countries and over 90% of the ballast water discharged in Australian ports originated from the Asia-Pacific region, with Japan contributing 54% of the total. Coastal or domestic shipping is of key importance; in 1991, 268 1 vessels movements between Australian ports resulted in the translocation of approximately 39.6 million tonnes of ballast water. With important natural coastal resources and aquaculture industries to protect, Australia was initially, and still is, a major promoter for the regulation of ballast water discharges, at both the national and international levels.

Recognition of the possibility of ballast-water mediated introductions of toxic dinoflagellate species was brought to government and public attention in the late 1980's. In 1989, the AQIS formed the Ballast Water Steering Cornmittee, composed of shipping and safety authorities and scientific and AQIS representatives. This cornmittee formed three working groups on the aspects of economy, legislation and science. The two former groups having accomplished their mandate, only the latter group, the Ballast Water Scientific Working Group, is still active and is now named the Research Advisory Group.

On February 1, 1990, the work of this Steering Committee resulted in the adoption by the AQIS of VoIuntary guidelines for ballast water and sediment discharge jî-om overseas vessels entering Australian waters. Their purpose is to reduce the risk of introduction, establishment and spread of nonindigenous species, particularly toxic dinoflagellates, through a range of ballasting practices such as: loading water that is visibly clean or certified-free of toxic dinoflagellates, ballasting in deep water, re-ballasting at sea, non-discharge of ballast water in Australian ports, minimizing the discharge of sediments in ports and disposa1 of sediment from cleaning outside Australian waters. The guidelines also address alternative arrangements, treatments, monitoring and general reporting procedures. As of June 1992, overall compliance with the guidelines was reported at 80 %. The main reason for non-compliance is safety factors resulting from the size of vessels concerned (AQIS 1994a).

However, neither the adoption of these Guidelines or the subsequent IMO Guidelines - which were largely based on the Australian ones - provided a satisfactory solution for the majority of domestic coastal vessels to reduce the potential translocation of introduced species between Australian ports (AQIS 1994a). Although a number of options remained available to the masters of vessels under the Guidelines, the AQIS considered that ports and harbour authorities should have the final responsibilityfor areas under their jurisdiction through national guidelines agreed to by al1 relevant authorities (AQIS 1994a).

As of 1992, the AQIS also implemented a testing prograrn for ballast water aimed specifically at identifjing toxic dinoflagellates and cholera, although it is currently limited in its scope to targeting problem ports and chronic carriers of these organisms. In recent years, the basis for this sampling program has been focused more on providing information for research purposes than towards developing controls or management criteria (AQIS 1994a).

In parallel with the above actions to minimize the risks of introduction of nonindigenous species to Australian waters, the AQIS commissioned a study to examine al1 aspects of ballast water management for ships visiting Australian ports and to focus on practical short and long term solutions. Noting the variety and complexity of ballast tank design and construction, together with almost complete lack of ship-board facilities and resources for tank cleaning and sediment removal, Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd et al. (1993) found clearly that ballast water, of itself, has never been regarded as an important issue in ship design but rather is seen as a means to the end of safe and efficient ship operation. They also observed that open ocean ballast exchange was quite widely practiced by ships destined for Australia and found it to be reasonably effective, although each individual vesse1 must be studied and analyzed to determine appropriate procedures. Finally, they assessed various ship design changes, ballast water management strategies and treatment options, as surnrnarized in section 6.0 of the present report.

A National Symposium on Ballast Water was held in May 1994 at which it was agreed that a coordinated national approach was required. Following this symposium, a draft Australian Ballast Water Strategy was prepared (AQIS 1994b). The Strategy, which is currently under public review, seeks to identifi the magnitude of the issue, cost efficient management options, research priorities, sources of funding, responsibilities of national organizations and high risk species. The draft strategy recommended the establishment of an Australian Ballast Water Management Advisory Council, supported by a Research Advisory Group and core funding for a new Center for Research on Introduced Marine Pests (CRIMP).

Since the beginning of 1995 and pending national endorsement of the Strategy, an Interim Ballast Water Management Advisory Council has been responsible for supervising the finalization and implementation of this Strategy, in conjunction with the AQIS. This council consists of government representatives from the departments of transport, quarantine, marine safety and environment, industry groups and a senior science representative from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO). In addition to the Strategy, and at the request of the Federal and State Ministers for Agriculture and the AQIS, a draft set of Australian Domestic Ballast Water Guidelines has been developed and was circulated for comment to Federal and State authorities and shipping industry representatives in January 1994. When jointly implemented with the Strategy, al1 types of ballast waters and vessels should be addressed (AQIS 1994b).

The question of whether the ballast water issue is either a federal or state responsibility has not facilitatedthe national application of the proposed strategy. One of the underlying problems is that the many acts, notices and regulations relevant to introduced marine pests and their transport vectors are administered by a number of different federal and state departments. Similar to the situation in the United States, these authorities differ in their jurisdictional powers within the

Australian States and, at present, it is unclear if they have the legislative authority to enforce ballasting controls. The interim Council has initiated forma1 consultation with al1 relevant state departments with a view to make recommendations to the federal government (Thresher and Martin 1995).

A significant aspect of the Australian situation regarding the ballast water issue is the proactive involvement of one of the most important private businesses in the Australian shipping industry, the Broken Hill Proprietary (BHP) Company Ltd. This Company fùnds the BHP Central Research Laboratories and cooperates actively with major governmental interveners in the issue. Recognizing the potential impacts of ballast water discharges on the marine environment and concluding that the impacts of ballast water can be managed, BHP pursues applied research projects and implements its own ballast water management strategy (Rigby and Taylor 1995).

5.2.2. Scientzfic activities

Australian scientists have been at the forefront of research into the transport of organisms in ballast water. Early studies in New South Wales in 1973 gave warning that fish species, previously known only from south-east Asia, were being sighted, and several researchers suggested that the vector was ballast water discharges (Hutchings 1992). This was followed by a report in 1975 of live invertebrates in ballast water sediment in a ship arriving at Twofold Bay Eden in New South Wales, originating from Japan (Ken 1994b). A study of both the sediments and ballast water from bulk cargo vessels sailing between Japan and Australia was investigated between 1976 and 1978, revealing the viable presence of two fish species, 22 zooplankton species and 45 other planktonic taxa. In sediments from ballast tanks, 16 species and at least 21 taxa were found. A general observation was that a reduced number of viable planktonic taxa were found in vessels with longer voyage times and those that had conducted mid-water exchange (Williams et al. 1988).

Hutchings et al. (1986) first reviewed the literature and noted the lack of baseline information regarding indigenous species and the difficulty of determining the vector of introduction of those species suspected to have been already introduced. Largely based on inferential evidence, they identified 14 species as probably having arrived in Australia via ballast water discharges (Table 3) and called for urgent baseline studies and monitoring programs in Australian ports receiving large volumes of ballast water.

Strengthening those conclusions, the newly formed Scientific Working Group produced its first position statement (Jones 1991), affirming that a large range of organisms have indeed been discharged into Australian waters via ballast water and that some of these have become established. Considering that exotic species could impact upon human health, commercial fisheries, marine aquaculture and the natural environment, the Group concluded that: 1) the risks associated with ballast water discharge in Australian ports are significant; 2) the means of reducing the risks to acceptable levels are not yet established; and 3) further research and development of techniques for minimising introductions is required. At the instigation of the AQIS, and in conjunction with the Scientific Working Group, a research program was established with the following aims: reviewing the current status of knowledge, study the impacts of known

Table 3. Suspected ballast-water mediated introductions in Australian waters.

Possible Species Invaded areas Possible origin introduction

1971 Yellowfin goby New South Wales (NSW)- Japan, Northeast Asia (Acanthogobiusjlavimanus) Botany Bay Sy Sydney, Port

Kembla

1972 Striped goby (Tridentiger Sydney and Port Kembla- Japan, Northeast Asia trigoncephalus) (NSW), Port Phillip Bay-

Victoria

1982 Japanese sea bass Pittwater, Sydney and Botany Japan, Korea, Taiwan, (Lateolabrax japonicus) Bay (NSW) China, Hong Kong

1985 Sobaity sea bream Swan River Estuary-West Arabian Sea (Sparidentex hasta) Australia (WA)

1975- 1978 Crustacea: Pyromaia tuberculata Cockburn Sound(WA) Eastern Pacific (Crab)

Eutylana arcuata Twofold Bay (NSW) New Zealand or Chile (Isopod) Newcastle (NSW)

Neomysis japonica Hunter R. (NSW) Japan (Mysid shrimp)

Tanais dulongi Spencer Gulf-South Australia Europe (Tanaid) 6.4)

? Polychaeta: Mercierella enigmatica Southern Australia India

1973- 1977 Boccardia proboscidea Victoria Japan or Eastern North Pacific

Pseudopolydora New South Walesand Victoria Japan, New Zealand or paucibranchiata Eastern North Pacific

197 1-1 982 Mollusca: Musctilista senhousia Swan R. (WA) Pacific coast of Asia (Asian mussel)

Theora Iubrica Swan R. (WA) Pacific coast of Asia (East Asian semilid bivalve)

Aeolidiella indica (Nudibranch) NSW, Queensland Japan, New Zealand,

South Africa or Mediterranean

Modified from Hutchings (1986) and Jones (1991)

introductions and the risk of establishment, study ports and shipping, investigate current ballast water management practices, treatment options and environmentally acceptable management strategies for ballast water (Jones 199 1, Kerr 1994b, Rigby et al. 1995).

Two more species have recently raised concerns, the Japanese brown kelp (Undaria pinnarifida) and the Northern Pacific seastar (Asterias amurensis) (AQIS 1994~) . The Japanese brown kelp is native to countries surrounding the East Sea and has recently been introduced to France with oysters for aquaculture, to New Zealand on ship's hulls and into Australia via ballast water (Sanderson 1990). Although it occupies approximately 50 km of coastline, its further dissemination via domestic ballast waters would have detrimental economic effects on local abalone industries (AQIS 1994~) . The Northern Pacific seastar is native to the Arctic Ocean, Bering Sea, Okhotsk Sea, Bering Strait, East Sea and part of the Japanese coast on the Pacific Ocean. Its main commercial impact is in Japan, where considerable work is being done to reduce its effets on shellfish mariculture (Johnson 1994). It was observed since 1988 in the vicinity of the port of Hobart, Tasmania, having probably arrived in the ballast water of a general purpose cargo vessel. Although its socio-economiccost has been limited to date, the seastar has great potential to decrease the aesthetic and recreational value of the marine environment and seriously affect wild and cultured mollusc populations (AQIS 1994~). For those reasons. the Australian Government established in July 1993 a National Seastar Task Force to control its spread.

Over the last decade, concerns have arisen over the issue of translocating toxic dinoflagellates via ships' ballast water. In 1986 and 1987, Hallegraeff et al. (1988) reported the first known occurrence of toxic dinoflagellates in estuarine Australian waters, then classified as Gymnodiniztm catenatum, Alexandrium catenella and Alexandrium minutum. Later exarnining recent marine sediments from Tasmania, Bolch and Hallegraeff (1990) found thirty-four dinoflagellate cyst types, which assemblages resembled those of New South Wales, Australia and New Zealand with the exception of G. catenatum. Reviewing harmful algal blooms and their apparently increasing occurrence, Hallegraeff (1 993) noted the increased awareness towards the issue and the resulting difficulty to determine if the increase is real.

Focussing on the potential for introduction of nonindigenous species via sediments from ballast tanks, Hallegraeffand Bolch (1991) determined that 70 % of 200 cargo ship ballast tanks sampled between 1987 and 1989 contained some sediments. More significantly, 31 of 83 of the samples examined contained dinoflagellate cysts, and a large number of these, notably Gonyaulax, Protoperidiniurn and Scrippsiella species, were successfully germinated into viable cultures. Moreover, four ships contained cysts of either toxic dinoflagellates A. catenella or A. tamarensis. Hallegraeff and Bolch (1992) subsequently determined that 65% of 343 samples collected from ballast tanks in cargo ships arriving in 18 Australian ports contained fine brown or black sediments, up to an estimated 4.00 tonnes per ship. Of these samples, al1 contained diatoms and 50% contained dinoflagellate cysts, of which 20 of the 53 species identified - including A. catenella, A. tamarensis, G. catenatum, and generas Diplopelta, Diplopsalopsis, Gonyaulax, Polykrikos, Protoperidinium, Scripsiella and 2ygubikodini:im - were successfully germinated.

Based on circumstantial evidence, Hallegraeff (1995) no\\ .;tates that a plausible scenario for the successful introduction and establishment of toxic dinoflagrllates in Australian waters includes:

1) ballast water intake during seasonal plankton blooms in Korean or Japanese ports, and to a lesser extent via resuspended sediments with adherent cysts; 2) survival as resistant resting cysts until inoculation at the time of ballast water discharge; 3) successful germination of cysts. sustained growth and reproduction of plankton cells in an Australian port; and 4) further spreading via coastal currents or domestic shipping, culminating under suitable environmental conditions in harmful algal blooms. Moreover, account should be taken of genetic data by Scholin et al. (1 994) who concluded that the multiple genetic strains in Japan may stem from introductions from North America and western Europe of A. tamarense, and that the similarity between Japanese and Australian strains of A. catenella may result from ballast water transfers.

Concerns for both the lucrative aquaculture and wild fisheries industries have pressed Australia to examine the transport of pathogens via ballast water - currently the only country to have done so. Disease agents may be transported on hosts with external parasites, dead or decaying tissue, fish eggs with attached viruses and faeces containing parasites and viruses. Of particular danger is the possibility of introducing an intermediate host into a new location, resulting in the completion of the life cycle of a given parasite. Through an epidemiological review, AQIS (1 994c) identified 45 viruses, 19 bacteria, 9 fungi, 35 protozoans and 25 metazoans as exotic pathogens capable of being introduced with ballast water. Of these, 10 viruses, 6 bacteria, 6 protozoans and 1 metazoa were considered to be potentially serious diseases, characterized by their cause of high mortalities or other loss of commercial value, capability of surviving in full salinity or brackish water and having known or probable hosts in Australian marine waters. To avoid possible exposure of coastal aquaculture facilities to exotic pathogens, it was recommended that authorities: 1) consider requesting that ballast water not be loaded closer than 5 km from the nearest seafarm or fish processing plant; 2) assess the vulnerability of Australian ports to introduction of exotic pathogens; 3) monitor the aquatic stocks in the vicinity of Australian ports that are at risk or restrict movement of vulnerable species from those ports; and 4) monitor ballast water and sediment.

Since the initial discussions of the Ballast Water Scientific Working Group, the research program was designed to provide necessary information to assess the risk posed by the discharge of ballast water into Australian ports. This fundamental objective required modelling of the information to aid officia1 authorities in assessing different management options and scenarios with regards to their costs and benefits, and across the range of threats implied.

This objective was realized as a bio-economic risk assessment that focused on the introduction or further spread of toxic dinoflagellates in Australian marine waters (ACIL Economics and Policy Pty Ltd 1994), which could be applied to other organisms. Using a consistent measurement of costs and benefits and sensitivity analyses, ACIL estimated that the widespread and frequent blooms of toxic dinoflagellates around Australia would likely result in a total cost of about $200 million affecting the Australian economy at the levels of tourism, public health and aquaculture. Moreover, a ballast control strategy with a level of effectiveness of 95% would be cost effective if treatment costs could be achieved in the region of 11 to 12 cents per tonne of ballast water. Those costs to Australia would be reduced by approximately 50% if controls were imposed multilaterally, including Australia's major competitors in bulk commodity trades.

A stochastic model was also developed which traced the flow of toxic dinoflagellates, by vessel. from port of origin through to port of discharge for five port regions of Australia. Ship traffic data were used and key model parameters relating to algal blooms - occurrences, distributions. cysting and mortality rates in tanks - were derived in workshops with experts and figures from the scientific literature. The results indicate that 10-1 5% of vessels from Japan and Korea take on, or carry over from past ballast loads, some organisms, with the numbers typically being modest - 10 to 10,000 per litre - and with a low encysting rate of 5-1 0%. A sensitivity analysis showed that the statistical distribution of the density of organisms in a bloom and, consequently, the variability of cyst numbers discharged in ports, have the greatest effect on the results of the model. Given the data deficiencies in respect of habitat suitability for the establishment of toxic algae, the estimates of those costs varied by one order of magnitude (ACIL Economics and Policy Pty Ltd 1994).

The current research in Australia is mostly being undertaken by the Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests (CRIMP) which was created in 1994. The Centre pursues the objectives of developing effective tools and methods: 1) to predict and assess risks and costs of marine Pest species; and 2) to control the spread and minimize the impacts of introduced marine species. In assessing the scale of the problem in Australian waters, the CRIMP has undertaken biological surveys for al1 major shipping ports in Australia (Thresher and Martin 1995). A cal1 for tenders was recently published to conduct a desk-top assessment of the risk of foreign marine organisms being introduced in 12 Queensland ports, based on environmental similarity matrices between each Queensland port and its set of source ports, the life history and environmental requirements of likely risk species and al1 stages of the ballast water cycle (Raaymakers 1995a). The CRIMP is also planning or initiating projects: 1) to develop a community-based "early-warning network" for coastal monitoring; 2) to assess the importance of hull fouling and domestic ballast water exchange in the coastal transport of the main pest species; 3) to develop treatment protocols with the mariculture CO-operatives to minimize the accidental transport of pest species with the live fish; 4) to examine port management practices on the colonisation success of invading species; and 5) to develop biological control techniques for established Pest species, particularly Asterias amurensis and Carcinus maenas (Thresher and Martin 1995). In addition, the Ports Corporation of Queensland is funding a study to test the effectiveness of conventional waste-water treatment technology, such as ozonation and UV treatment, on organisms found in ballast water (Raaymakers 1995b).

5.3 NEW ZEALAND


New Zealand is another island nation that is highly dependent on shipping to sustain its economy. Due to a low population density and absence of a significant heavy manufacturing sector, it also has thousands of kilometres of unpolluted coastline, ideal for supporting an active aquaculture and fishing industry (Hayden 1995a). For the past three years, the mean number of vessels to visit New Zealand waters has been calculated at 1,860 per year, with an average 4.7 million tonnes of ballast water - mostly of Asian origin - annually discharged into New Zealand waters (Hayden 1995a). Coastal shipping is also important in the translocation of introduced species and undoubtedly

resulted in the spreading of the Japanese brown kelp Undaria pinnatgfida within New Zealand (Nelson 1995).

In 1988, the New Zealand Ballast Water Working Group (BWWG) was formed, comprising mostly scientists and, subsequently, representatives from government departments. research organisations, regional councils, fishing and shipping industries. The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF) Regulatory Authority which develops policies regulating the importation of plants and animals and associated pests and diseases was asked to join the BWWG in 199 1, which it now currently chairs. MAF was seen as the logical lead agency for the development of guidelines to minimize potential introductions of unwanted organisms via ballast waters because of its responsibility for quarantine issues and an in-place system of inspectors who visit al1 international vessels within New Zealand waters (Hayden 1995b).

The shipping industry, as represented by the New Zealand Shipping Federation, has been proactive in the resolution of the ballast water problem since 1990 when it was informed by the Australian authorities that New Zealand trans-Tasmanian ships could potentially transport toxic diflagellates in their ballast waters. To address Australian concems, the Federation established and funded a survey to certify the waters and sediments of New Zealand ports for toxic dinoflagellates.

In March 1992, the MAF implemented Voluntary controls on the discharge of overseas ballast water within New Zealand with the intention of reducing the risk of the introduction and establishment of unwanted aquatic species via ballast water. Largely based on the IMO and AQIS guidelines, the main features of these voluntary guidelines include: 1) not discharging within New Zealand ballast water loaded outside its territorial waters without prior reporting to an inspector; 2) providing documented evidence of the origin of the ballast water and of its exchange in mid- ocean or certification that it has been disinfected or that it is free of toxic dinoflagellates. In addition, sediments from the cleaning of the holds or ballast tanks, or anchor chain and locker have to be disposed of in a manner approved by an inspector. The master has also the option to discharge ballast in an approved area of New Zealand or to an onshore facility, or to have the ballast water tested to demonstrate that it is not a risk. At al1 times, the master of the vessel has the ultimate authority in regards to vessel and crew safety, if judged that a mid-ocean exchange is not possible.

As with similar regulations in other countries, the Biosecuriy Act of 1993 in New Zealand contains the legislative powers likely to be required in order to enforce any aspect of ballast water policy or guidelines that the government chooses to apply (Alexander 1995). This is because the terrn "risk good", refered to in the Act, is defined as anything that is suspected to pose a risk, and will result in the exposure of organisms in New Zealand to damage, disease, loss or harm, or, will interfere with the diagnosis, management or treatment of -unwanted organisms. This definition allows an inspector to invoke the powers of this Act, if there is reason to suspect that ballast water arriving into New Zealand poses a risk to resident flora and fauna (Alexander 1995). Similarly, the Resource Management Act allows the regional councils to control ballast water discharges of New Zealand ships and, when the Amendment Act comes into effect, foreign vessels as well. It is felt, however, that the risk posed by exotic organisms in ballast water would be best addressed by the

Biosecuriry Act of 1993 and that MAF would be the best agency to take the responsibility for ballast water (Zuur 1 995).

Notwithstand ing the powers of the Biosecuriv Act of 1993, the lack of present information regarding ship safety, possible effects on the New Zealand economy of enforced ballast water management and lack of resources seems to have limited the use of the Act as an enforcement mechanism and precluded the development of the voluntary controls into legislated regulation. At present, the Act is used mainly to ensure that vessels provide correct information about their ballasting operations, to prevent discharge of ballast sediments and, more specifically, to prevent the discharge of Tasmanian ballast water during the months when larvae of the seastar Asterias amurensis may be in the water. When a vessel arrives in New Zealand, an inspector from the MAF Quarantine Services boards the vessels to ca ry out various quarantine functions, including a check on the ballast water arrangements for the vessel. While the master is required to complete a "Vesse1 Ballast Report Form", which includes details of compliance with the Voluntary Controls on Ballast Water Discharges, no actual physical testing of the waters is routinely undertaken. The form is updated if the ship moves around the Coast and at the final port of call, the form is removed from the vessel and entered into a database at MAF. Another limitation to implementing regulations or voluntary controls is, that as of 1995, there are no approved dumping areas for ballast waters or any onshore treatment facilities in New Zealand (Alexander 1995). Hence, the inspectors are limited in suggesting options, of which sealing of the ballast tanks is one of the few available, the other is requesting a vessel to leave territorial waters.

Despite the aforementioned limitations, and based on the presently unverified claims of the ships' master on the Voluntary Ballast Water Report Form, of the annual 1,860 vessel visits, an average of 89.5% of vessels claim to comply with the voluntary controls by either conducting mid-ocean exchange or by not discharging at al1 (Hayden 1995a). In addition, the percentage of vessels which exchanged their ballast prior to discharge has increased during the three years in which the controls have been in place while the percentage of vessels which admit to not complying with the controls has decreased. However, the overall efficacy of mid-ocean exchanges of compliant vessels and the accuracy of ships' masters information will not be accurately determined until a testing program and risk analysis assessment have been completed (Hayden 1995b).

The Royal Society of New Zealand sponsored a ballast water symposium from June 27 to 29, 1995, in Wellington,New Zealand. The participants in the workshops on management came to the major conclusion that, undoubtedly, there was an important problem in the inevitability of the entry into New Zealand waters of exotic organisms, the potential for economic, environmental and social harms from those organisms and the lack of preparedness to deal with the problem, the scale and significance of which not being known. Symposium members strongly agreed that Governement needed to be the-key instigator of immediate action into the problem, and that a comprehensive national ballast water strategy was essential. This strategy should include research linked with and driven by policy and management requirements with its outcomes providing a scientific basis for decision-making. In addition, it was suggested that with the availability of the draft Australian strategy and IMO participation, it would be possible to drafi a New Zealand strategy by the end of 1995 (Royal Society of New Zealand 1995).

Currently, there is strong impetus from various aboriginal, conservation and governmental groups to make current voluntary guidelines mandatory. For example, the Maori people claim that the present controls do not safeguard adequately their interests in marine farming, customary fisheries and commercial fisheries, as secured in the Treaty of Waitangi Settlement Act, the Maori Fisheries Act and the Sealords Fisheries Deal. Thus, any collapse of fisheries could have constitutional as well as economic implications (Jones 1995). Enforceable control measures for which a 100% compliance level can be obtained should be aimed at. This should by done through the advocacy and national ratification of a new annex to the MARPOL convention on ballast water and changes in the design and construction of vessels and by implementing the Resource Management Act to foreign vessels (Weeber 1995). Similarly, the Department of Conservation has grave doubts that the guidelines are tight enough and recommends that the new Resource Management Act continues to cover consideration of ballast effects (Jones and Edwards 1995).

Not surprisingly, organizations with economic interests adopt a more cautious position, although recognizing the problem. For instance, the New Zealand Fishing Industry Board makes a strong point about implementing management measures founded on sound, scientifically based risk analysis and monitoring (MacFarlane 1995), as do the shipping industry (Plowrnan 1995) and the ports companies (Mayson 1995).

5.3.2. Scientzfic activities

Several marine organisms have been introduced to New Zealand waters via ships7 ballast, such as two distinct varieties of the Japanese brown kelp Undaria pinnatijda, the Californian crab Pyromaia tuberculata - now introduced to Japan -, the Asian nesting musse1 Musculista senhousia, and the bivalve Theora lubrica (Nelson 1995). In 1992, the dinoflagellate Alexandrium ostenfeldi was discovered in sediments near a mooring buoy for the steel industry at Taharoa, and ballast water discharges were blamed as the vector (Anderson 1992). To date however, no substantial impacts of economical or ecological nature have been reported or demonstrated for species introduced in New Zealand.

Many participants to the 1995 Royal Society of New Zealand symposium have deplored the lack of baseline data with regards to coastal environment and native species (Jones and Edwards 1995, MacKenzie 1995, Nelson 1995), shipping patterns and ballast water volumes and origins (Hayden 1995a, Nelson 1995), information essential for developing a national strategy and targeted management policies.

Priority areas for ballast water research, which were generally agreed upon during the symposium, revolve around the need to identiQ the risk to New Zealand waters and possible management optioiis. While the voluntary guidclincs have been in effect for about three years, their effectiveness still needs to be scientifically assessed. Other research needs pertain to a revised data acquisition system on shipping patterns and ballast water volumes and origins, the development of risk assessment techniques, the determination of high priority species, the development of monitoring protocols and strategies, and isssues such as ship technology and port management practices.

5.4 OTHER COUNTRIES

Dispersed efforts have also been deployed in ballast water related management and research activities by Israel, Chile, the United Kingdom, Germany, Sweden and Japan.

5.4.1 Regulatory aspects and management activities

In 1994, Israel issued Notice to Mariners 5/94 stating that "[ ...] al1 ships destined for Israeli ports must exchange any ballast that has not been taken on in open ocean", and also requiring proper records. Similarly, Chile adopted in 1995 its "Order for preventive measures to avoid transmission of harmful organisms and epidemics by ballast water". This Order states that "[ ...] any ship coming from abroad [...] is required to renew its ballast [...] at a distance of not less than 12 nautical miles from the coast."

For those six countries mentionned above, and most probably al1 others, no adequate data nor comprehensive study exist on the origins and volumes of ballast water discharged in national waters. In the United Kingdom (U.K.), studies of limited scope have been undertaken in England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland. Based on responses to a questionnaire sent to 127 ports in England and Wales in 1995, it was estimated that 16.8 million tonnes of ballast water are annually discharged in these ports, through over 16,000 operations. Except 4% of the ports that request compliance with the IMO guidelines, none have any policy at al1 related to ballast water discharges (Laing 1995). For the 102 ports of Scotland, the annual volume of ballast water discharge was estimated at 25.7 million tonnes (Macdonald 1994) while in Ireland, it was roughly estimated at 200,000 tonnes only for the port of Cork Harbour (Minchin and Sheehan 1995).

Except for the U.S., no country has any legislation aimed specifically at minimizing the risk of introduction of nonindigenous species via ships' ballast water and associated sediments. In the U.K., for example, there is no legislation to prevent the dumping of accumulated sediments from ballast tanks into coastal and inshore waters (Macleod 1995). Moreover, 79% of the ports in England and Wales have no policy or regulations governing ballast water discharges; of the 13 that do, these are related to operational safety and only five request compliance with the IMO guidelines (Laing 1995). In Scotland, under the Control of Pollution Act of 1971, it is an offence to discharge a polluting substance - which includes micro-organisms - in controlled waters. Thus, the Scottish River Purification Authorities, who are responsible for enforcing the Act, can sample ballast waters to determine the presence of such polluting organisms. However, the authorities do not have the jurisdiction to prevent the ship from discharging or to legally request details of paperwork. In addition, ballast discharges are presently excluded from the Merchant Shipping Act and the Food and Environment Protection Act. This situation in Scotland has produced a dilemma in that official authorities have statutory duties under an Act, but have no practical or legal powers to fulfil their obligation (Macleod 1995). In Ireland, there are presently no general controls on segregated ballast water or procedures for managing discharges with the exception of controls on oily ballast (Minchin and Sheehan 1995).

Swedish authorities have begun to assess the magnitude and consequences of ballast water introductions. In January 1995, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, in conjunction

with the Department of the Environment and national and regional representatives from shipping. governen t and research groups, established a temporary working group. Goals for this group included a report detailing the current knowledge of the ballast water situation in Swedish waters, identification of potential "hot spots" of concern, suggest research priorities and identib sources of funding. In addition, greater cooperation is suggested with international organizations such as the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM) and the Oslo and Paris Commissions (OSPAR) (WGITMO 1995).

5.1.2. ScientlJic activities

At the ICES 1995 meetings, the Baltic Marine Biologists (BMB), an organization with representatives from the Baltic countries, presented their concerns regarding the continued introductions of nonindigenous species to the Baltic Sea. The BMB have formed the Working Group on Nonindigenous Estuarine and Marine Organisms (NEMO) in the Baltic Sea, with goals being to summarize relevant information and to collaborate with other ballast water working groups (WGITMO 1995). The working group had its first meeting in Klaipeda, Lithuania in June 1995, and requested that IMO Member States implement the Ballast Water Guidelines, and pay additional attention to fouling organisms on the hulls of ships. Initial studies undertaken by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency on al1 known introductions in Swedish coastal waters have suggested that 10 out of a total of 20 unintentional introductions into the BaItic Sea are due to ballast water discharges (Jansson 1994).

In the U.K., the Joint Nature Conservation Cornmittee produced a drafl report on introduced marine flora and fauna to England, Scotland and Wales. The study evaluates the nonindigenous species' origin, date and method of introduction, the reasons for their success, rate of spread, current distribution, actual and potential effects on native ecosystems and commercial uses, and control methods. Sixteen species of marine algae, five diatoms, one angiosperm and 3 1 species of invertebrates have been identified as nonindigenous and described (Eno 1995). The majority are red algae, polychaete worms, crustaceans and molluscs. No nonindigenous sponges, bryozoans or echinoderms have been found. More than half of the species have been introduced in association with shipping, of which 9 ,5 and 15 species are suspected to have been respectively transported via ballast water, ballast and hull fouling, and hull fouling (Eno 1995). Another project consisting of sampling oil tankers discharging ballast water at Hamble on the south Coast of England is near completion at Southampton University (WGITMO 1995). For Cork Harbour, Ireland, Minchan and Sheehan (1995) reviewed 24 nonindigenous species and suggest that the majority have been accidentally introduced through aquaculture or hull fouling, although two dinoflagellate species may have been through ballast water discharges.

The Scottish Office seems to be the only official authority in the U.K. to have initiated a research program to investigate biologial hazards in ballast water, particularly toxic phytoplankton. The field work begun in 1994 and, to date, water and sediment sarnples have been respectively collected from the ballast tanks of 32 and 24 ships visiting four important Scottish ports and whose origins include ports in northern and southern Europe, the U.S. and the U.K. (Macdonald 1995). Taxonomic analyses of these samples have revealed the presence of dinoflagellate cysts,

diatoms, Protozoa, two species of freshwater algae, motile dinoflagellates (Gonyaulax spp.) and nematodes (Macdonald 1995).

In Germany, the Federal Environmental Agency in Berlin launched, in 1992, a joint research project between the Institut für Meereskunde Kiel and the University of Harnburg to investigate flora and fauna carried in ballast tanks and on ship hulls by international ship traffic to German ports and to assess the ecological risk arising from possible nonindigenous species introductions. Over a period of three years, Gollasch et al. (1995) sampled 308 vessels and found over 350 different taxa, of which aout 30% are nonindigenous to the Baltic and North Sea. The main groups of organisms recorded are diatoms, dinoflagellates, chlorophytes, cyanophytes, crustaceans, molluscs, polychaetes and fish larvae. A preliminary study was also carried out in the Mediterranean to assess the effect of temperature on the survival of ballast organisms (Gollasch et al. 1995).

In Berlin, other researchers have been studying the protozoa entering German ports in ballast water discharges, in vessels which primarily originate from the Far East, the MediterraneadRed Seas and North America (Chesapeake Bay). The sampled material investigated so far has revealed the presence of 30 taxa belonging to zooflagellates, arnoeboid organisms and ciliates. One strain of amoeba originating from the Suez region is considered to be a new species not previously described (WGITMO 1995).

A substantial database in the form of an "Annotated Bibliography on Transplantations and Transfers of Aquatic Organisms and their Implications on Aquaculture and Ecosystems" containing about 9000 references is at an advanced stage of preparation by Dr H. Rosenthal, from Germany (WGITMO 1995).

Information on Japanese activities pertaining to ballast water have been difficult to obtain. Because Japan is an island country with one of the most important international trade, one can reasonably speculate that the quantity of ballast water discharges in Japanese ports is one of the largest in the world. While Japanese governrnent officials are aware of the problems associated with ballast water issues, there has been very little published regarding research, ballasting practices and controls (Kelly 1992). The only Japanese regulation is Rule 24 of the Ports and Harbor Act which prevents any ship from disposing of ballast, oil, coal or any garbage within 10 km from the boundary of the port area (Someya et al. cited in Kelly 1992). MEPC documents since 1988 contain only one submission from the Japanese delegation and it refers only to safety considerations of deballasting at sea (Kelly 1992). Citing Carlton, Kelly (1992) reports two cases of ballast-mediated species introduction in Japan: the Chesapeake Bay blue crab (Callinectes sapidus) once found near YokohamaNaval Base - perhaps from submarine ballast water - and the Dungeness crab (Cancer magister) collected in Northern Japan. Considerable work is being done on the Northern Pacific seastar (Asterias amurensis) to reduce its negative effects on shellfish mariculture in Japan (Johnson 1994). Also, experiments on heat treatment of ballast water are being carried out by the Japanese Shipowner's Association and BHP Ltd of Australia on board the ore carrier Ondu Maru (MEPC 1995).

6.0 POSSIBLE CONTROLS AND TREATMENTS

The control of the introduction of nonindigenous species via ships' ballast water and sediments can be viewed under the two main categories of options: physical/chemical treatments and non- treatment management measures.However, as discussed below, these two categories are not mutually exclusive, and may be feasible when used in different combinations at the various stages of the voyage of a vessel. The type and size of a vessel will also influence the selection of the most appropriate ballast water treatment system as ballast water volumes, pumping rates and engine room arrangements Vary significantly.

As per the Australian conceptual approach (AQIS 1993a), there are three basic treatment scenarios for ballast waters; ship-board, involving onboard facilities for treatment during ballasting or en route; port-based, referring to a dedicated ship or barge fitted with treatment equipment which can service berthing ships; and land-based, involving a connecting pipeline or barge to transport the ballast water from the berthing ship to a storage facility andlor treatment plant. Furthermore, ballast water and sediment can be treated at the following stages in the ballasting operation, as adapted from Schormann et al. (1 990):

- prior to ballasting, such as the coating of tanks with biocidal agents; - on departure, such as loading pre-treated water from onshore supply facility; - during ballast intake, such as straining, microfiltration, cyclonic separation, UV radiation,

ultrasonics, electric current, chemical disinfection, simultaneous pumping of freshwater while ballasting with saltwater and vice versa;

- during transit, such as conducting mid-ocean or fresh water exchange, heating or addition of salt or chemicals;

- during deballasting, using some of the aforementioned options; and - after discharge into a storage or treatment shore-based facility.

6.1 TREATMENT METHODS

The treatments reviewed here are either physical or chemical treatments as biological control techniques have not as yet been sufficiently studied. However, in Australia, the Center for Research on Introduced Marine Pests (CRIMP) is investigating the possibility of the introduction of parasites against already established nonindigenous marine species (Thresher and Martin 1995).

6.1.1 Physical

Screening andfiltration Ballast water intakes on most vessels usually have a cover plate or grate perforated by many small holes ranging in diameter from one to two centimeters. This plate acts as a coarse filter for debris and for large adult organisms of shrimp and fish, but easily permits planktonic stages to pass through during pumping or gravitation of ballast water (Carlton et al. 1995). Regulating the dimension of the openings is an easy way to reduce the uptake of large organisms. Although their efficacy would be limited to removing organisms of sizes greater than 500 Fm, meshes and strainers require limited space and could be installed in the waterpiping

system, making them suitable for ship-board treatment (AQIS 1993b). Pollutech Environmental Ltd (1992) considered that filtration with a 50 to 150 pm wedgewire strainer was technically practical and feasible while Carlton et al. (1995) and Lloyd's Register of Shipping (1995) concluded that microfiltration with 25 pm woven mesh screen filters was operationally and economically feasible on board. To remove the majority of organisms down to the 5-10 pm size range, granular filtration preceeded by flocculation with a coagulant is effective but even when using pressure filters, space requirements preclude its use on-board ship and can be accomodated only in land-based facilities (AQIS 1993b).

Gravi@ processes: These include sedimentation, flotation and centrifugation. The large surface area needed for sedimentation basins could be accomodated in land-based installations. However, the ballast tanks could also be used as settling tanks and the pipework altered to draw water from both the surface and bottom of the tank. In both cases, the use of coagulants would probably be required (AQIS 1993b). Flotation of particles to the surface by injecting fine air bubbles into the water'has been shown to be effective in removing algae in sewage treatment facilties, and could be similarily implemented on ballast water. However, this option would be restricted to land-based installations (AQIS 1993b). Centrifugation or cyclonic separation may be only effective for macroorganisms due to the closeness of the specific gravity of many plankton to that of seawater (AQIS 1993b, Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995).

Ultraviolet (UV) radiation: Although the lethal effects of ultraviolet light (UV-B and UV-C) on marine and freshwater planktonic organisms remain unstudied for most species, UV sterilization of ballast water can be effective in inactivating bacteria and viruses provided there is a prior filtration (AQIS 1993b, Carlton et al. 1995, Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995, Pollutech Environmental Ltd 1992). While UV radiation could be safe for human health, environmentally acceptable and effective (Carlton et al. 1995, Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995) it still needs to be tested on the scale of vesse1 ballasting operations (Carlton et al. 1995).

Microvaves: Microwaves are not a pursuable option for ballast water because of the low penetration in water and the high costs involved (Carlton et al. 1995).

Electric shock: Laboratory experiments by Montani et al. (1995) have shown that treatment by electric shock at 100 V AC for 5 seconds successfully inhibited the germination of phytoflagellate cysts. While these authors concluded that this is a likely approach to treat both ballast waters and sediments, Carlton et al. (1995) emphasize its reduced efficacy in saltwater and that it could be costly and hazardous to human health.

Heat treatment: The effectiveness of heating depends on the temperature reached, which itself depends on the volume of the water to- be heated, the duration of the voyage and the temperature of the waters in which the ship navigates. Bolch and Hallegraeff (1993) determined in the laboratory that the heating of ballast water (30-90 seconds at 40-45 OC) may provide an effective, environmentally sound solution to inactivate dinoflagellate cysts. Subsequent work showed that cysts could be killed at temperature as low as 35 OC for 30 minutes to 5 hours, but this needs to be investigated on the cysts of the more toxic dinoflagellate species (Rigby and Taylor 1995). At those temperatures, however, some organisms, particularly viruses, could still survive. Trials on

the Australian vessel M. K Iron Whyalla, using the heat fiom the cooling water of the ship's engines during the sea voyage, failed to reach and maintain a constant temperature of at least 40°C (Rigby and Hallegraeff 1992), while in Japan, similar experiments carried out by the Japanese Shipowner's Association on board the ore carrier Ondu Maru obtained temperatures of 43°C (MEPC 1995). Although possibly applicable in new, redesigned vessels (Carlton et al. 1995). thermal treatment of ballast water seems impractical and expensive for application to present day vessels because of the costs for retrofitting the piping system and the difficulties in obtaining and maintaining a sufficiently high temperature to eliminate organisms (AQIS 1993b, Carlton et al. 1995). In addition, thermal stresses to the vessel and discharge of heated ballast water as a thermal plume would also have to be considered (Carlton et al. 1995, Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995).

Ultrasonics: Ballast water could be recirculated through ultrasonics or UV systems while the vessel was undenvay, although these may require more space than initial intake on-line treatment. The use of ultrasonics to sterilize large volumes of water has not been very effective (Pollutech Environmental Ltd 1992) as sterilization depends upon exposure time. Experimental work, scaled to ship ballasting pararneters are now required to test the effectiveness of this technique (Carlton et al. 1995).

Removal of sediments: The options for the treatment and disposa1 of ballast water sediments are presently more limited than for ballast waters. This may be partly attributable to the difficulties in physically removing these sediments completely fiom the tanks themselves, which must be nearly empty of overlying water. Deep sea disposal of sediment is a desirable method, especially for shallow-water species of phytoplankton (Carlton et al. 1995). However, based on associated problems with mid-ocean exchange of ballast waters, it is highly unlikely that this procedure could be completed at sea. In port, limited time may be available for tank access. Disposa1 of ballast tank sediments in port facilities is a sine qua non of ballast management as they should never be disposed of into harbor or port waters (Carlton et al. 1995). However, land-based structures have to be constructed for this purpose. Characterization of sediments may also be necessary in some cases, for disposa1 at sea or on land, to ensure that they are not contaminated at levels above regulatory lirnits. At present, ballast water sediments may be removed during routine maintenance of vessels while dry-docked, or while ballast tanks are drained as much as possible and disposed of in a suitable marner on land (Carlton et al. 1995).

6.1.2 Chernical

A long list of chemical biocides presently exists which could be usd to treat ballast water and sediments. In general, the use of chemical biocides, although most probably effective and usable under emergency conditions, has numerous disadvantages - Carlton et al. (1 995) list 17 - such as hazards to human health and environment, operational difficulties, and costs. Amongst these, the use of biocides on "raw", uncharacterized ballast water is impractical, particularily for ship-board treatment (AQIS 1993b). Moreover, the residues from some of those treatments would probably require further treatment to reduce their volume before disposai to landfill (AQIS 1993b) or in accordance to national environmental regulatory procedures (Carlton et al. 1995). However, the following is an overview of those chemical treatments which have the most potential or have been shown to be effective in certain species-specific cases.

Chlorine: Chlorine is one of the commonly used and effective oxidizing agents in land-based sewage treatment facilities, however its specific effects on most individual species of aquatic organisms is not k n o w (Carlton et al. 1995). Australian researchers have suggested that the use of chlorine to disinfect ballast water could be effective following a filtration step (AQIS 1993b) but. along with the use of chlorine dioxyde, chloramines or sodium/calcium hypochlorite, it is not a likely option because of related health and environmental hazards, costs and operational difficulties (Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995). The electrolytic generation of hypochlorite onboard ship using seawater as the source of chloride could possibly be a cost-effective option but would need further investigation (Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995).

Copper and silver ions: The electrolytic generation of copper and silver ions is considered to be safe, reasonably effective and technically feasible. However, it is environmentally suspect and would have to be tested on ballast water (Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995).

Ozonation: Treatment of ballast water with ozone could be effective following a filtration step (AQIS 1993b). However, being a highly toxic irritant, it has essentially the same disadvantages as many of the biocides and may also be a corrosive agent (Carlton et al. 1995, Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995).

Hydrogen peroxide: Treatment with hydrogen peroxide could be effective following an initial filtration step (AQIS 1993b). Montani et al. (1995) showed that at a concentration of 150 mg11 for 48 h., H,07 prevented germination of dinoflagellate cysts in laboratory while Ichikawa et al. (1 993) achieved the same with 100 mg& of H207 for 96 h. Montani et al. (1 995) concluded that, although H70, is likely to be a safe and environmentally acceptable chemical reagent for use in ballast tanks, the required concentration makes this treatment too expensive. For example, a 100,000 tonne carrier would need at least 10 tonnes of hydrogen peroxide to produce the desired effect.

Oxygen deprivation: The addition of chemicals to create anaerobic conditions in ballast tanks has been proposed, but has several significant limitations; the difficulty in completely sealing the tanks themselves, the generation of corrosive hydrogen sulfide from decaying organisms and the potential discharge of anoxic, sulfur-rich water at sea or in coastal waters (Carlton et al. 1995, Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995). In addition, this treatment would be ineffective against many organisms (AQIS 1993b), particularily organisms in the ballast sediments and encysted stages (Carlton et al. 1995).

Tank wall coatings: Toxic antifouling paints or biocidal coatings on ballast tanks walls typically act as contact poisons and would therefore not be biocidal to planktonic organisms in suspension or those in sediments (Carlton et al. 1995, Pollutech Environmental Ltd 1992).

Salinity adjustment: Altering water salinity in the ballast tanks may be achieved by either adding fresh water to salt water or salt water to fresh water. Both approaches are based on basic biology in that alterations in salinity beyond the tolerance range of an organism will result in dismption of physiological osmoregulatory processes eventually resulting in mortality. In the laboratory, Bolch and Hallegraeff (1 993) have s h o w that germination of dinoflagellate cysts was prevented only at

extremely high salinities of 100 %. The addition of sodium chloride directly into ballast tanks is unrealistic on account of the large quantities needed and potential problems associated with disposa1 upon reaching the designated port of cal1 (AQIS 1993b, Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995). However, depending on the regularity of the shipping route, constant fieshwater-saltwater salinity adjustments, such as mid-ocean exchange, could be at least partially effective (Carlton et al. 1995, Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995).

Treatment of sediments: A commercial product for the treatment of ballast water sediments, called Mud conditionerTM, has been available for at least 12 years. When mixed with ballast water during ballasting operations, this product reacts with the mud and silt to form large, loosely dispersed, non-adhering particles which can be easily discharged with the ballast water during deballasting (Carlton et al. 1995). A dosage of 100 to 200 litres is required per 1,000 tonnes of ballast water, and as such, may not be technically feasible for vessels with large ballast capacities.

6.2 NON-TREATMENT OPTIONS

Based on the basic philosophy that ballast managment should seek to prevent the introduction of al1 forms of nonindigenous organisms, Carlton et al. (1995) have grouped management options into four approaches; the voyage, the vessel, the industry and the treatment approach, as discussed above. An important corollary to this philosophy is that no single option or alternative will be a unique solution. Instead, a number of alternatives from the four approaches and in varying combinations, may be the ultimate answer to a concept that Carlton et al. (1995) refer to as "Integrated Ballast Management".

Management measure under the voyage approach can be implemented either on or before departure, en route or on arrival, aiming respectively at preventing the uptake of organisms, the survival of organisms, and the release of organisms.

The options that could be implemented on or before departure are:

Providing ships with ciiy treated@esh water: This appears a particularly useful option for vessels on defined regional routes serving determined cities, where specific arrangements can be made with the ports authorities involved (Carlton et al. 1995).

Shipboard management measures: These include avoiding to ballast at night - when some planktonic species migrate to the surface - or at certain times of year - during bloom periods of plankton - or in waters that contain abundant phytoplankton, suspended sediments or sewage discharge. Shipboard management of ballasting operations add to the overall efficacy of ballast control by enhancing the probability of not boarding organisms. However, these do not reduce the need for exchange of water or for the use of other treatments (Carlton et al. 1995).

The options that could be implemented on departure or en route are:

Exchange, partial exchange or deballasting at sea: In the views of Carlton et al. (1995) and Pollutech Environmental Ltd (1 992), mid-ocean exchange has the advantages of: 1) having a high probable efficacy in removing and/or killing freshwater organisms; 2) having a high probable efficacy in reducing the numbers and diversity of neritic organisms; and 3) being feasible, at least to some extent, by most vessels without necessitating any retrofitting. The chief concerns of exchange at sea are: 1) safety aspects related to the integrity of the ship; 2) costs associated to the use of pumps; 3) the high probability of residual organisms remaining in ballast water or residual water; and 4) the low probability of washing out the accumulations of sediment. Ships that cannot exchange completely the waters of certain tanks can still usefully alter the salinity of water by partial exchange (Carlton et al. 1995). Deballasting at sea without reballasting is an option that has potential under limited circumstances and for certain vessels only (Carlton et al. 1995). When exchange was not achieved in mid-ocean, useful options that can be implemented before arrival include the exchange or deballasting of ballast water in back up zones or by returning to sea (Carlton et al. 1995).

Continuousflushing of tanks: Continuous flushing and overflowing of ocean water through the tanks is another possible method of exchange on certain vessel types. However, trials using the dye methylene blue on the bulk carrier M. ?? Iron Whyalla, with a total ballast tank capacity of 56,325 tonnes, revealed that approximately three tank volumes of water would need to be flushed through to achieve an exchange of at least 95% of the original ballast water with mid-ocean water. This would substantially increase the costs of this measure and may not always be possible during insufficientlylong trips. Moreover, up to 25% of the plankton sediments had then remained on the bottom of the ballast tanks (Rigby and Hallegraeff 1992).

The options that can be implemented on arrival in a port of cal1 are:

Keep the ballast onboard: If no exchange could be done, then the ship may either keep the ballast onboard or return to sea or to an agreed upon back up zones to exchange or deballast (Carlton et al. 1995). However, the retention of ballast water is rarely an option because it is a required operational procedure to manage the cargo canying capacity of the vessel and the economic imperatives argue against increasing the length of stay of water in the tanks (Carlton et al. 1995).

Transfer ballast water to another vessel: The transfer of water to a lighter vessel in need of ballast is also an option that can be considered in certain ports (Carlton et al. 1995).

Transfer to/fiom land-based facilities: The loading of certified-quality water or discharge to a shore facility is considered a poor .option as it would not solve the problem of sediments and unpumpable water, and be very costly in shore facility infrastructures, retrofitting of ships and operations (Pollutech Environmental Ltd 1992). Furthermore, the discharging of ballast water in existing sewage treatment facility would have to be limited to freshwater in order not to harm or destroy the microbial flora of the plant organic breakdown system and which would always be subject to pollution by pathogens contained in the ballast water (Carlton et al. 1995).

Management measures can also be implemented under the vessel approach which focuses on the size and construction design of existing and future vessels. Short terms measures would entai1 modifiing existing vessels through retrofitting, although the responsibility for absorption of associated costs has yet to be resolved. Longer term measures woud focus on the development of new ship construction designs that reduce the need for ballast water or improve their ballast water management capabilities, either by facilitating mid-ocean exchange or by incorporating physical/chemical treatments (Carlton et al. 1995).

The industry approach to ballast water management is based upon the industry's views of the human and vessel safety aspects, and the economics of the standard operating procedure for ballasting/deballasting. Ship integrity and safety are major considerations because modern ships are structurally designed for still-water ballasting. A computer simulation of still water shear forces and bending moments on the M. V. Iron WhyalIa - an Australian single deck bulk carrier weighing 14 1,500 t - indicated that mid-ocean ballast water exchange, by completely emptying and refilling ballast tanks, is unsafe for a ship of this size and design (Rigby and Hallegraeff 1992). A study by Woodward et al. (1994) on a tanker, dry-bulk carrier and a containership revealed that under storm conditions, in occasional waves of greater than 7 m, wave-induced bending moments and shears exceed design values. They also concluded that stability during the ballasting/deballasting operation is not likely to present a problem. These conclusions are somewhat similar to those arrived at by Prior (1 995) after investigating two typical bulk carriers transiting the Laurentian Trough in the St. Lawrence Estuary.

The economic considerations are specifically related to potential freight delays by implementing one or combinations of the aforementioned measures, retrofitting of vessels and increased insurance costs. The latter pertains specifically to the practice of mid-ocean exchange, as it is not technically feasible for al1 vessels, and sinkings may result if not carried out in ideal conditions (Lloyd's Register of Shipping 1995).

7.0 SUMMARY

With the longest navigable coastline in the world, bordering the Atlantic, Arctic and Pacific Oceans, as well as the Great Lakes, Canada is one of the countries where shipping plays the most important role in national and international trade. Canadian coastal waters receive yearly over 52 million tonnes of ballast water from foreign ports around the world, compared to the 121 Mt, 69 Mt, > 43 Mt, and 5 Mt received respectively by Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand. In addition, the domestic and coastal shipping are responsible for the translocation of large quantities of ballast water. Although environmental factors of the receiving waters affect the probability-of survival and cstablishrnent of a species, both the frequency and volume of the discharges clearly play a significant role.

Despite those large volumes, these are the only data that exist, since no country has put in place a reliable data acquisition system to document the origins and volumes of the ballast water they receive. Those countries who do collect data rely on the voluntary response of ship officers, who are often unconcemed by the ecological risk of ballast water. With the routine use of ballast water

in shipping operations, this situation results in large amounts of unacknowledged ballast water - about 13 % of total in U.S.A. - being discharged in addition to the aforementioned figures.

Evidence suggests that ballast water and sediments have been responsible for numerous cases of detrimental introductions of nonindigenous species, such as the zebra musse1 in the Great Lakes. Indeed, roughly a dozen studies conducted on this subject have shown unequivocally that hundreds of species of organisms are being transported in the ballast water and sediments of ships. Moreover, many of these organisms could not have been transported to their new habitat by an alternative dispersal mechanism. Approximately half of the cases of marine introductions have been attributed to shipping activities, such as ballast water and sediments discharges, and hull fouling. Specifically, the Canadian and U.S. Great Lakes, other U.S. waters, Australia, Baltic Sea and U.K. are thought to have seen, respectively, the establishment of over 139, 16, 14, 10 and 9 nonindigenous species via ballast water discharges.

Both at the national and international levels, those considerations have led many scientific symposiums, governmental and non-governmental organizations, and representatives from the shipping industry to formally recognize the ecological and economical threats posed by the introduction of nonindigenous species via ship-transported ballast water. Unanimously, emphasis was put on the global scale of the problem and the necessity for international cooperation.

Having recognized the problem in 1993, the International Maritime Organization adopted the voluntary Guidelines for Preventing the Introduction of Unwanted Aquatic Organisms and PathogensJi.om Ships' Ballasr Water and Sediment Discharges, based essentially on the exchange of ballast water in the open ocean. However, only Australia and New Zealand implement these guidelines. The IMO's Marine Environrnent Protection Committee is currently drafting a set of regulations as a possible new annex to MARPOL 73/78.

To date, only a few countries are in the initial stages of recognizing the problem and even fewer have taken some action to minimize the risk of introduction of nonindigenous species by ships' ballast water. The United States is currently the only country to implement regulations. These actually protect both the Canadian and American waters of the Great Lakes, and are expected to be amended this year to enable their future implementation in al1 U.S. regions where their voluntary implementation will have been judged insufficient. In Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States, only voluntary guidelines either specific to vessels from foreign origin, a species or a region have been implemented. Although the compliance levels to those guidelines are approximated at over 80 % of ships entering those countries, their overall effectiveness is questionable because of their limited geographic coverage and the process itself of mid-ocean exchange. With the exception of Canada, these countries have each put in place a national ballast water working group that has produced - or will shortly, in the case of New Zealand - a draft ballast water management strategy. In addition, Australia and the United States have each initiated an integrated research program with a scientific advisory committee to monitor its results and pursue its development.

As a result of this governmental action and cooperation with industry and scientific organizations, Australia and the United States are the two countries which have conducted the most in depth and

widest variety of published research into species introductions, actual transport of organisms in ballast water and potential treatment methods. Australia's shipping industry has been particularly proactive in applied research. Canada, Germany and Japan are presently the only other countries to have initiated some research, but without any strategic planning or coordination. With the exception of the Australian quarantine and U.S. Coast Guard authorities, ballast water studies are presently hampered by the lack of legal or officia1 support from govemment and shipping authorities to conduct sampling.

One of the major deficiencies in ballast water research and management is the fact that presently, it cannot be predicted with any degree of certainty whether a potentially economically or ecologically devastating species will be discharged and, if it were to be, whether the organism will become successfully established. Based on the review of a large array of options, it appears that no single option is likely to be the ultimate solution to ballast water management. Moreover, there is no adequate treatment method to sterilize such large quantities of water and sediments. In the immediate, the exchange of ballast water, coupled with ballasting management in the prevention of organism uptake, is the most cost-effective and environmentally acceptable management strategy presently available. However, while mid-ocean exchange substantially reduces the risk of introductions of nonindigenous species, it it has limited effectiveness in removing al1 potentially invasive species in al1 types of vessels. For exarnple, a Canadian study showed that ballast water exchange eliminated al1 living freshwater-tderant zooplankton in only 67% of 24 vessels sampled. In addition, ballast water exchange is limited to certain vessel types, due to current ship design and safety considerations; residual and unacknowledged ballast water and sediments also present a significant risk because of their ability to support living and encysted organisms.

In this context, it seems that there is no unique solution to the problem posed by ballast water. However, it is also advocated by Australia and widely agreed that much can be done now to minimize the risk of introduction of nonindigenous species by ship-transported ballast water while pursuing research. An effective worldwide management of ballast water and sediment can be achieved mainly through national and international cooperation, in the form of guidelines or regulations. This can be done by implementing a series of available treatment and non-treatment options, in combinations adapted to the vessel characteristics and operating environment, that ensure human and vessel safety, and are logistically, environrnentally and economically acceptable.

In addition, many major interveners from the scientific community, industry, conservation and government al groups favor a scientifically-based risk assessment approach to quanti@ the risks, on the basis of expected costs and benefits, with regards to different management options. Australia has taken a first step towards this with a bio-economic risk assessment focussing on toxic dinoflagellates. For- example, it was dctermined that the costs of toxic algae blooms to the Australian economy would amount to about $200 million per year and warrant a 10 to 12 cents per tonne of ballast water treatment cost, which would be reduced by half through international action.

There remain many needs in terms of research and development, in particular concerning the routes and mechanisms of transport of organisms, treatment of ballast water, effectiveness of open ocean exchange, and the design and construction of ships. As previously mentioned, the

frequencies, quantities, origins and sites of discharge of ballast water as well as the current practices regarding operational ballast water management are poorly known. To improve the effectiveness of open ocean exchange, one must also take into account the <( compatibility ))

between the receiving ports and the ballasting sites with regards to the risks of introduction of species. In other respects, the development of new construction designs for vessels could improve considerably their capability to manage and treat the ballast water they carry.

In terms of other controls and treatments, the heating of ballast water during oceanic voyages seems the most promising on board option. Further studies are required however, to examine the possible ranges of achievable temperatures in the tanks of a variety of vessels on different routes in conjunction with temperatures required to inactivate the wide taxonornic range of organisms known to be present in ballast waters. Besides thermal treatment, research is also required on the use of other promising treatment methods at the scale of ballasting operations, particularly: 1) microfiltration used in conjunction with UV-radiation; 2) the electrolytic generation of hypochlorite on board ship using seawater; 3) the electrolytic generation of copper and silver ions; and 4) electric schock.

In conclusion, many nonindigenous species have been introduced into Canadian ports and coastal waters, which annually receive one of the world's largest arnounts of foreign ballast water. Canadian waters are unprotected from this threat because there are presently no specific ballast water regulations or national policies. However, there are some voluntary guidelines for mid- ocean ballast water exchange that are fairly complied to, but these are of questionable effectiveness due to both their limited geographic coverage and the limitations associated with mid-ocean exchange. Regulations enforced by the U.S. Coast Guard, under the 1990 Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act, are presently the only ones that protect both the American and Canadian portions of the Great Lakes. Although Canada, as do many other countries, supports the international action initiated by the IMO, it has no structured management nor research programs to address the issue at the national level. Its few activities are segmented by region and not integrated between officiai authorities and industry representatives.

As for many countries, Canada needs to assess the risks posed by ship-transported ballast water to its aquatic habitats and resources. This should be done by setting up a national ballast water working group which would develop a national ballast water strategy, in consultation with shipping, fishing and aquaculture industries. Hopefully, this will lead to an integrated research program regarding ship-transported ballast water and, eventually, to policies and regulations.

8.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to thank J.R. Forbes, of the Institute of Ocean Sciences, DFO, Sidney, B.C., for attentively reviewing the manuscript, and G. Ruiz of the Smithsonian Environrnental Research Center, Edgewater, Maryland for reviewing the section on the United States. Acknowledgements for valuable editorial contributions ancilor information also go to: R. Alexander, Gulf Fisheries Centre, DFO, Moncton, N.B.; J. Bunch, Habitat Management and Environrnental Sciences Directorate, DFO, Ottawa, Ont.; R. Cormier, Transport Canada, Dartmouth, N.S.; G. Jamieson,

Pacific Biological Station, DFO, Nanaimo, B.C.; D. Kieser, Pacific Biological Station. DFO. Nanaimo, B.C.; A. Locke, Gulf Fisheries Centre, DFO, Moncton, N.B.; T. Morris, Marine Regulatory Directorate, DOT, Ottawa, Ont.; A. Niimi, DFO, Burlington, Ont.; D.M. Reid. Consultant,Nepean, Ont.; Dr. G. Rigby, BHP Research, New South Wales, Australia; C. J. Wiley. Transport Canada, Sarnia, Ont.; and R. Wilson, Institute of Ocean Sciences, Sidney. B.C.

9.0 REFERENCES

ACIL Economics and Policy Pty Ltd. 1994. Bio-economic risk assessment of the potential introduction of exotic organisms through ship's ballast water. Ballast water research series, Report no. 6. April 1994. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. 266 p.

Alexander, M. 1995. New Zealand - Voluntary guidelines and Biosecurity Act. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - A Marine Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 71-79.

American Fisheries Society. 1991. Ballast water introductions. AFS Position Statement. Fisheries, Vol. 16, No. 1,4-6.

Anderson, 1. 1992. End of the line for deadly stowaways ? New Scientist, October 24, 1992 (no. 1844) : 12-13.

Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS).1993a. Ballast water treatment for the removal of marine organisms. Report no. 1, June 1993, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, 99 p.

Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS). 1993b. International survey of IMO member States relating to ships ballast water. MEPC 34. 22 p.+ annexes.

Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS) 1994a. Ballast water management program 1993. MEPC 35lInf. 19. 45 p.

Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS). 1994b. Drafi Australian ballast water management strategy. 19 p. + 3 Annexes.

Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS). 1994c. An epidemological review of possible introductions of fish diseases, Northern Pacific seastar and Japanese kelp through ship's ballast water. Ballast water research series, Report no. 3. January 1994. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. 287 p.

Biodiversity Science Assessment Team. 1994. Biodiversity in Canada: A science assessment for Environment Canada. Environment Canada, Ottawa, 275 p.

Bio-Environmental Services Ltd. 198 1. The presence and implication of foreign organisms in ship ballast waters discharged into the Great Lakes. Vol. 1 and II. Prepared for the Water Pollution Control Directorate, Environmental Protection Service, Environment Canada, March 198 1. 97 pp. + tables.

Bolch, C.J. and G.M. Hallegraeff. 1993. Chemical and physical options to kill toxic dinoflagellate cysts in ships' ballast water. J. Mar. Env. Eng. 1 : 23-29.

Bolch, C.J. and G.M. Hallegraeff. 1990. Dinoflagellate cysts in recent marine sediments from Tasmania, Australia. Botanica Marina, 33: 173- 192.

Busiahn, T.R. and J.R. McClain. 1995. Status and control of ruffe (Gymnocephalus cernutts) in Lake Superior and potential for range expansion. Ecovision World Monograph Series (in press).

Cangelosi, A. 1995. Updating the Nonindigenous Species Act. Aquatic Nuisance Species Digest, November 1995, Vol. 1, No. 2. p. 1-1 8-1 9.

Carlton, J.T. 1995. Exotic species update: Are ballast water regulations working? Focus, March- April 1995: 8-9.

Carlton, J.T., D.M. Reid and H. van Leeuwen. 1995. The role of shipping in the introduction of nonindigenous aquatic organisms to the coastal waters of the United States (other than the Great Lakes) and an analysis of control options. The National Biological Invasions Shipping Study. Prepared for the United States Coast Guard and the National Sea Grant Prograrn/ConnecticutSea Grant Project, Report no. CG-D-XX-92, 197 p., Appendices A-1.

Carlton, J.T. 1985. Transoceanic and interoceanic dispersa1 of coastal marine organisms: the biology of ballast water. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev. 23: 313-371.

Chesapeake Bay Commission. 1995. The introduction of nonindigenous species to the Chesapeake Bay via ballast water. Strategies to decrease the risks of future introductions through ballast water management. January 5, 1995. Chesapeake Bay Commission, U.S.A. 28 p. + Appendix A.

Cohen, A.N., J.T. Carlton and M.C. Fountain. 1995. Introduction, dispersa1 and potential impacts of the green crab Carcinus maenas in San Francisco Bay, California. Mar. Biol. 122: 225- 237.

Department of Transportation of the United States of America. 1993. Ballast water management for vessels entering the Great Lakes. Federal Register, Vol. 58, No. 66, April 8, 1993, p. 18330-18335.

Dochoda, M.A. 1989. Preventing ballast water introductions in the Great Lakes. Focus, Vol. 14, No. 3, November/December 1989, p. 15-1 7.

Dochoda, M.A. 1991. Meeting the challenge of exotics in the Great Lakes: the role of an international commission. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 48 (Suppl. 1): 171-1 76.

Dochoda, M.A., A.L. Hamilton and B.L. Bandurski. 1990. International Joint Commission, Great Lakes Fishery Commission Workshop on Exotic Species and the Shipping Industq. Summary and recommendations. February 28-March 2, 1990, Toronto, Ontario, 12 p. + 4 appendices.

Emery, A.R. and G. Teleki. 1978. European flounder (Platichthysflesus) captured in Lake Erie, Ontario. Can. Field-Natur. 92: 89-91.

Eno, N.C. 1995. Non native marine species in British waters. Joint Nature Conservation Comittee, No. 7, September, 4p.

Fifth International Zebra Musse1 Conference. 1995. Zebra musse1 and other aquatic nuisance organisms conference 1 995. February 2 1-24, 1995. Toronto, Ontario. Conference proceedings.

Forbes, R. (ed.). 1994. Proceedings of the Fourth Canadian Workshop on Harmful Marine Algae. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquatic Sciences 2016: 92 p.

Gaudiosi, R. 1995. Ballast water management: an integrated approach. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Annual Science Conference, 83rd Meeting, September 1995, Aalborg, Denrnark. Theme session O: Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications. 0 : 14,6 p.

Gauthier, D. and D.A. Steel. 1995. A synopsis of the Canadian situation regarding ship- transported ballast water. Proceedings of ICES session Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications, September 1995, Aalborg, Denrnark, in J.T. Carlton (ed.) (in press). The ICES Cooperative Research Report. ICES, xx p.

Gollamudi, H. and A. Randall. 1995. Policy incentives to prevent introduction of non-indigenous species via shipping. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Annual Science Conference, 83rd Meeting, September 1995, Aalborg, Denmark. Theme session O: Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications. 0: 17.

Gollasch, S., M. Darnmer, J. Lenz and H.G. Andres. 1995. Non-indigenous organisms introduced via ships into German waters. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Annual Sciencc Confcrencc, 83rd Meeting, September 1995, Aalborg, Denmark. Theme session O: Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications. 0 : 13, 9 p. + 8 figs.

Gosliner, T.M. 1995. Introduction and spread of Philine auriformis (Gastropoda: Opisthobranchia) from New Zealand to San Francisco Bay and Bodega Harbour. Mar. Biol. 122: 249-255.

Gosselin, S., M. Levasseur and D. Gauthier. 1995. Transport and deballasting of toxic dinoflagellates via ships in the Grande Entrée Lagoon of the Îles-de-la-~adeleine (Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada), p. 591-596. In P. Lassus, G. Arzul, E. Erard, P. Gentien and C. Marcaillou [eds]. Harmful marine algal blooms - Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Toxic Marine Phytoplankton, October 1993, Nantes, France. Lavoisier, Intercept Ltd.

Grosholz, E.D. and G.M. Ruiz. 1995. Spread and potential impact of the recently introduced European green crab, Carcinus maenus, in central California. Mar. Biol. 122: 239-247.

Hall-Armstrong, J. 1996. Ballast water: state of the science, guidelines and regulations. North Shore of Lake Superior Remedial Action Plans. Tech. Rep. 2 1, 19 p. + Annexes.

Hallegraeff, G.M. 1995. Transport of toxic dinoflagellates via ship's ballast water: An interim review. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Annual Science Conference, 83rd Meeting, September 1995, Aalborg, Denmark. Theme session O: Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications. 0 : 15, 12 p.

Hallegraeff, G.M. 1993. A review of harmful algal blooms and their apparent increase. Phycologia, 32 (2): 79-99.

Hallegraeff, G.M. and C.J. Bolch. 1992. Transport of diatom and dinoflagellate resting spores in ships' ballast water: implications for plankton biogeography and aquaculture. J. Plankton Res. 14: 1067-1084.

Hallegraeff, G.M. and C.J. Bolch. 1991. Transport of toxic dinoflagellate cysts via ships' ballast water. Mar. Poil. Bull. 22(1): 27-30.

Hallegraeff, G.M., D.A. Steffensen and R. Wetherbee. 1988. Three estuarine Australian dinoflagellatesthat can produce paralytic shellfish toxins. J. Plankton Res. lO(3): 533-541.

Hartig, J.H., D.P. Dodge, D.Jester, J. Atkinson, R. Thoma and K. Cullis. 1996. Toward integrating remedial action planning and fishery management planning in Great Lakes areas of concern. Fisheries 2 1 (2): 6- 1 3.

Hayden, B. 1995a. Assessing ballast water volumes origins, and contents. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - Marine Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 86-90.

Hayden, B. 1995b. A New Zealand perspective on ballast water. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Annual Science Conference, 83rd Meeting, September 1995, Aalborg, Denmark. Theme session O: Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications. 0: 16, 8 p.

Hayes, K. 1995. Ecological risk assessrnent for ballast water. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Annual Science Conference, 83rd Meeting, September 1995, Aalborg, Denrnark. Theme session O: Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications. 03, 20 p.

Hutchings, P. 1992. Ballast water introductions of exotic marine organisms into Austra1ia:Current status and management options. Mar. Poll. Bull. 25(5-8): 196- 199.

Hutchings, P., J. van der Velde and S. Keable. 1986. Guidelines for the conduct of surveys for detecting introductions of non-indigenous marine species by ballast water and other vectors - and a review of marine introductions to Australia. Report to FIRC, FIRTA 8611 10. 147 pp.

Ichikawa, S., Y. Wakao and Y. Fukuyo. 1993. Extermination efficacy of hydrogen peroxide against cysts of red tide and toxic dinoflagellates, and its adaptability to ballast water of cargo ships. Nippon Suisan Gakkaishi 58: 2229-2233.

International Joint Commission - Great Lakes Fishery Commission (IJC-GLFC). 1990. Exotic Species and the Shipping Industry: The Great Lakes - St. Lawrence Ecosystem at Risk. September 1990. 75 p.

Jansson, K. 1994. Alien species in the marine environment: Introductions to the Baltic Sea and the Swedish West Coast. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency Report 4357, Solna, Sweden, 68 p.

Johnson, D. 1994. Seastar fight gains momentum. Update on the northern Pacific seastar Asterias amurensis. Aust . Fish. 53(1): 25-29.

Jones, M.M. 1991. Marine organisms transported in ballast water: a review of the Australian scientific position. Bureau of Rural Resources Bulletin No. 11, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. 48 p. + vii.

Jones, L. and J. Edwards. 1995. Department of Conservation perspectives. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - A Marine Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 26-36.

Jones, S. 1995. Maori perspectives. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - A Marine Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 20-21.

Kelly, J.M. 1992. Transport of non-native organisms via cargo ship ballast discharge: Characterizing the sciencelpolicy interface. A thesis submitted in partial fulfillrnent of the requirements for the degree of Master of Marine Affairs, University of Washington, U.S.A., December 1, 1992.

Kelly, J.M. 1993. Ballast water and sediments as mechanisms for unwanted species introductions into Washington State. J. Shellfish Res. 12(2): 405-410.

Kerr, S. 1994a. Ballast water ports and shipping study. Ballast Water Research Series, Report no .5, February 1994. Australian Governrnent Publishing Service, Canberra, 123 p.

Kerr, S. 1994b. Status of Australian ballast water research: a review of the ballast water research programs in Australia. Scientific Working Group on the Introduction of Exotic Marine Species through Ship's Ballast Water. Bureau of Resource Sciences, March 16, 1994, 18 pp.

Laing, 1. 1995. Ballast water discharge into coastal waters of England and Wales. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Annuai Science Conference, 83rd Meeting, September 1995, Aalborg, Denmark. Theme session O: Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications. 0 :2 , 11 p.

Leach, J.H. 1995. Non-indigenous species in the Great Lakes: Were colonization and damage to ecosystem health predictable? J. Aquatic Ecosystems Health 4(2): 11-12.

Leach, J.H., E.M. Mills and M. A. Dochoda. 1995. Non-indigenous species in the Great Lakes: Ecosystem impacts, binational policies and management. Draft chapter in: W. Taylor (ed.). Great Lakes Fishery Policy and Management: A Binational Perspective. Michigan State University Press.

Lloyd's Register of Shipping. 1995. Disinfection of ballast water- a review of potential options. Technical Investigation, Propulsion and Environmental Engineering Department. Report no. 95lTIPEEl5052.1, July 1995, 29 p. + 1 appendix.

Locke, A., D.M. Reid, W.C. Sprules, J.T. Carlton and H.C. van Leeuwen. 1991. Effectiveness of mid-ocean exchange in controlling freshwater and coastal zooplankton ballast water. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1822, 46 p., Appendices A-L.

Locke, A., D.M. Reid, H.C. van Leeuwen, W.G. Sprules and J.T. Carlton. 1993. Ballast water exchange as a means of controlling dispersa1 of freshwater organisms by ships. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 50: 2086-2093.

Macdonald, E.M. 1994. Ballast water management at Scottish ports. Fisheries Research Services Report 10194, 23 p.

Macdonald. E.M. 1995. Dinoflagellate resting cysts and ballast water discharges in Scottish ports. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Annual Science Conference, 83rd Meeting, September 1995, Aalborg, Denrnark. Theme session O: Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications 0 : 10, 12 p.

MacFarlane, A. 1995. Fishinglaquaculture industry perspectives. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - A Marine

Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 22-25.

MacKenzie, L. 1995. Importance of taxonomic data of existing marine flora and fauna. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - A Marine Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 91-94.

Macleod, L. 1995. Risks associated with the uncontrolled discharge of ships' ballast and the legislative controls available in Scotland. Water and Environmental Management: Journal of the Institution of Water and Environmental Management, April 9: 173-178.

Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) Meeting. 1995. Unwanted aquatic organisms in ballast water, 38th session, Agenda item 13. MEPC 38/13, October 18, 1995, 9 p. + am.

Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) Meeting. 1996. Unwanted aquatic organisms in ballast water, 39th session, Agenda item 7. MEPC 3817, July 25, 1995.

Martin, F.D. and G.E. Drewry. 1978. Development of fishes of the mid-Atlantic Bight, an atlas of egg, larval and juvenile stages. Volume VI: Stromateidae through Ogcocephalidae. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Services Prograrn 416 p. Report FWSIOBS-78/12 volume 6.

Mayson, J. 1995. Port Company perspectives. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - A Marine Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 5 1-60.

McCarthy , S. and F. Khambaty . 1994. International dissemination of epidemic Vibrio cholerae by cargo ship ballast and other nonpotable waters. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 60(7): 2597-2601.

Mills, E.L., J.H. Leach, C.L. Secor and J.T. Carlton. 1993a. What's next? The prediction and management of exotic species in the Great Lakes (report of the 1991 workshop). Great Lakes Fish. Cornrn., 22 pp.

Mills, E., J.H. Leach, J.T. Carlton and C.L. Secor. 1993b. Exotic species in the Great Lakes: A history of biotic crises and anthropogenic introductions. J. Great Lakes Res. 19: 1-54.

Mills, E.L., J.H. Leach, J.T. Carlton and C.L. Secor. 1994. Exotic species and the integrity of the Great Lakes: Lessons from the past. BioScience 44(10): 666-676.

Minchin, D. and J. Sheehan. 1995. The significance of ballast water in the introduction of exotic marine organisms to Cork Harbour, Ireland. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Annual Science Conference, 83rd Meeting, September

1995, Aalborg, Denmark. Theme session O: Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications. O: 1, 15 p., including figures and tables.

Montani, S., S. Meksumpun and K. Ichimi. 1995. Chemical and physical treatments for destruction of phytoflagellate cysts. J. Mar. Biotechnol. (in press).

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 1993. Harmful marine organisms in ballast water: The United States Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force. 34th Meeting of the Marine Environment Protection Cornmittee of the International Maritime Organization. MEPC 34lInf. 31, 3 p.

Nauke, M.K. 1995. Provisions for the control and management of ballast water to minimize the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Annual Science Conference, 83rd Meeting, September 1995, Aalborg, Denmark. Theme session O: Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications. 0 : 8, 8 p.

Nelson, W. 1995. Nature and magnitude of the ballast water problem in New Zealand. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - A Marine Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 13-19.

Paterson, D. 1995. International initiatives. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - A Marine Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 61-65.

Plowman, K. 1995. Shipping industry perspectives. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - A Marine Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 45-50.

Pollutech Environmental Limited. 1992. A review and evaluation of ballast water management and treatment options to reduce the potential for the introduction of non-native species to the Great Lakes. Contract report. Ship Safety Branch, Canadian Coast Guard, Ottawa, Ontario, March 1992.

Pratt, D.M., W.H. Blust and J.H. Selgeby. 1992. Ruffe, Gymnocephalus cemus: Newly introduced in North America. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 49: 16 16- 16 18.

Prior, A.D. 1995. Ballast water exchange study Phase 1. March 1995. For Transport Canada, Marine Regulatory Directorate, Ottawa, Ontario, by Melville Shipping, Ottawa, Ontario, 33 p. plus Appendix A.

Raaymakers, S. 1995a. Queensland Ports (Australia) to undertake ballast water risk assessment. Mar. Poll. Bull. 30(10): 630.

Raaymakers, S. 1995b. Australian Port to fund ballast water treatment research. Mar. Poll. Bull. 30(11): 684.

Rigby, G. and G. Hallegraeff. 1992. Ballast water exchange trials and marine plankton distribution on the M. V. Iron Whyalla, January 1992. Report no. BHPR/ENV/R/92/011, 3 1 p. in Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS). 1993. Shipping ballast water trials on the bulk carrier M. V. Iron Whyalla. Report no. 2, September 1993, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, 123 p.

Rigby, G. and A. Taylor. 1995. Ballast water: its impact can be managed. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Annual Science Conference, 83rd Meeting, September 1995, Aalborg, Denrnark. Theme session O: Ballast Water: Ecological and Fisheries Implications .O: 1 1, 8 p.

Rigby, G.R., A.H. Taylor, G.M. Hallegraeff and P. Mills. 1995. Progress in research and management of ships' ballast water to minimise the transfer of toxic dinoflagellates, p. 821-824. In: Harmful marine algal blooms, P. Lassus, G. Arzul, E. Erard, P. Gentien and C . Marcaillou (eds .). Technique et Documentation-Lavoisier , Intercept Ltd. 1995.

Roy, S. 1994. Analyse d'échantillons de sédiments provenant de réservoirs d'eau de ballast. INRS - Océanologie. Contract report prepared for Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 21 p.

Royal Society of New Zealand. 1995. Surnrnary of conclusions reached at the symposium "Ballast water - A Marine Cocktail on the Move", held on June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand, 5 p.

Sanderson, J.C. 1990. A preliminary survey of the distribution of the introduced macroalga, Undaria pinnatifida (Harvey) Suringer on the east coast of Tasmania, Australia. Bot. Mar. 33: 153-157.

Schloesser , D . W. 1995. Introduced species, Zebra mussels in North America in Encyclopedia of Environmental Biology. Vol. 2. 337-356.

Scholin, C.A., M. Herzog, M. Sogin and D.M. Anderson. 1994. Identification of group- and strain-specific genetic markers for globally distributed Alexandrium (Dinophyceae). II. Sequence analysis of a fragment of the LSU rRNA gene. J. Phycol. 30: 999-101 1.

Schormann, J., J.T. Carlton and M.R. Dochoda. 1990. The ship as a vector in biotic invasions. IMAS 90 Marine Technology and the Environment, May 1990, 23-25.

Smith, T.E. and S.R. Kerr. 1992. Introductions of species transported in ships' ballast waters: the risk to Canada's marine resources. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1867: v+ 16p.

Someya A., K. Hiroshi and A. Kaneko. 1991. Report on the basic legal structure and current movement of port and coast zone in Japan. Coastal Management Journal 20(1): 49-72.

Sprules, W.G., H.P. Riessen and E.H. Jin. 1990. Dynamics of the Bythotrephes invasion of the St. Lawrence Great Lakes. J. Great Lakes Res. 16(3): 346-35 1.

Stanley, J.G., R.A. Peoples Jr. and J.A. McCann. 1991. U.S. federal policies, legislation, and responsibilities related to importation of exotic fishes and other aquatic organisms. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.48 (Suppl. 1): 162-166.

Subba Rao, D.V., W.G. Sprules, A. Locke and J.T. Carlton. 1994. Exotic phytoplankton species from ships' ballast waters: risk of potential spread to mariculture on Canada's east Coast. Can. Data Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 937: iv + 51 p.

Thompson Clarke Shipping Pty Ltd, Gutteridge Haskins & Davey Pty Ltd and Lloyd's Register of Shipping. 1993. Ballast water management study in Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS).1993. Ballast water management. Ballast water research series, report no. 4. September 1993. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. 254 pp.

Thresher, R.E. and R.B. Martin. 1995. Reducing the impact of ship-borne marine introductions: Focal objectives and development of Australia's new centre for research on introduced marine pests. Theme session on Ballast Water, ICES September 1995, Aalborg, Denmark, CM 1995/0:4, 7 p.

Turncliffe, V. [ed.]. 1996. Introduction of exotic species: the marine perspective in British Columbia. University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. 18 p. + Appendices.

Weathers, K. and E. Reeves. 1995. The defense of the Great Lakes against the invasion of nonindigenous species in ballast water. U.S. Coast Guard, Interna1 document. 1240 East Ninth Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44 199-20-60, 17 p.

Weeber, B. 1995. Conservation, recreation and tourism: non-government organisation perspectives. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - Marine Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 37-44.

Williams, R.J., F.B. Griffiths, E.J. Van der Wal and J. Kelly. 1988. Cargo vesse1 ballast water as a vector for the transport of non-indigenous marine species. Estuar. Coastal and Shelf Science 26: 409-420.

Woodward, J.B., M.G. Parsons and A. Troesch. 1994. Ship operational and safety aspects of ballast water exchange at sea. Marine Technology 3 l(4): 3 15-326.

Working Group on Introductions and Transfers of Marine Organisms (WGITMO). 1995. Report of the Working Group on Introductions and Transfers of Marine Organisms, Kiel, Germany , April 10- 13, 1995. ICES CM 1995/ENV:9 Ref: E + F, 64 p.

Zuur, B. 1995. New Zealand - Resource Management Act. Conference proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, National Symposium "Ballast Water - Marine Cocktail on the Move", June 27-29, 1995, Wellington, New Zealand. Roy. Soc. N.Z. Misc. Ser. 30: 80-85.

Références additionnelles :

Harrison, P.G., et R.E. Bigley. 1982. The recent introduction of the seagrass Zostera japonica Aschers. and Graebn. to the Pacific coast of North America. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 39: 1642- 1648.

Quayle, D.B. 1964. Distributionof introduced marine mollusca in British Columbia waters. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 21: 1155-1181.

Waldichuck, M., P. Lambert, et B. Smiley. 1994. Exotic introductions into BC marine waters, p. 220-223. Dans Harding, L.E., et E. McCullum (éds.) Biodiversity in British Columbia: Our changing environment. Environnement Canada, Service canadien de la faune.

dfo library mpo l a il llllllll ilill - library 1 mpo - bibliothèi i l a ilill il llllllll 7...

Documents