Article 8 (h) CBD Invasive Alien species: species that threaten ecosystems, habitats or other species.

1. INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES AND FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS 2. THE REGULATORY REGIME 3. GAPS AND INCONSISTENCIES 4. RECOMMENDATIONS Franklin River Region

Why do humans introduce freshwater species? Deliberately: biocontrol, re-stocking for recreational fisheries, Gambusia (Mosquito Fish)Rainbow Trout “Accidentally”: escape of garden or aquarium species; vegetation caught on propellers, anchors, watercraft and trailers.

Salvinia Infestation Before After

1. INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES AND FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS Almost one-third of the species listed by the IUCN as the worst invaders are garden or aquarium escapees 92% of fish introductions occur in freshwater systems In Australia alien fish species are ‘implicated in the decline of 42% of Australian native fish and several frog species’

2. THE REGULATORY REGIME International Guidance – the CBD Articles 7 (c) and 8(l) identify processes and activities that have, or are likely to have a significant adverse impact on biological diversity (ie threatening processes) Article 8 (f) rehabilitate, restore and recovery threatened species and ecosystems Article 8 (h) specifically targets one particular threatening process, the deleterious impacts of IAS.

IDENTIFY ACTUAL IAS IDENTIFY POTENTIAL IAS

Australia’s Regime Legislation – formal listing procedures for Key Threatening Processes (KTPs) Legislation – development of lists of prohibited species Policy Instruments such as strategies, frameworks and plans

JURISDICTIONKEY THREATENING PROCESS Commonwealth KTPs Accepted for Listing under Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Loss and degradation of native plant and animal habitat by invasion of escaped garden plants, including aquatic plants. (8-Jan-2010) Infection of amphibians with chytrid fungus resulting in chytridiomycosis (23-July 2002) New South Wales KTPs Accepted for Listing under Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 Infection of frogs by amphibian chytrid causing the disease chytridiomycosis ( 22 August 2003) Invasion and establishment of the cane toad (Bufo marinus) (21 April 2006) Predation by Gambusia holbrooki Girard, 1859 (plague minnow or mosquito fish) (29 January 1999) KTPs Accepted for Listing under Fisheries Management Act 1994 The introduction of fish to fresh waters within a river catchment outside their natural range. (Ref. No. FR20 File No. FSC 01/08) The degradation of native riparian vegetation along New Wales water courses (Ref. No. FR19 File No. FSC 01/07) Victoria Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 Degradation of native riparian vegetation along Victorian rivers and streams. Introduction of live fish into waters outside their natural range within a Victorian river catchment after Australian Capital Territory No threatening processes yet declared

Lists of prohibited species All jurisdictions enacted legislation to declare specific species of plants or fish as ‘noxious,’ weed, pest or feral, in essence the creation of lists of prohibited species (or prohibited lists). Examples include schedule 6C of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 (NSW) that at the time of writing contains one declared plant and 137 declared fish Caulerpa taxifolia (Caulerpa) spread Ornamental Koi – by anchor chains noxious fish

Strategies, frameworks and plans Examples include: Biosecurity and Biodiversity Strategies Translocation Guidelines (National Code of Practice for Recreational and Sport Fishing (RecFish Australia 2001) Management Plans (Mary River Cod Research and Recovery Plan)

3. GAPS AND INCONSISTENCIES KTPs More than half of Australia’s state and territory governments, do not provide a legislative framework for listing the impacts of invasive alien species as KTPs Australian legislation that uses KPTs is often permissive rather than obligatory Expensive to prepare and implement abatement and recovery plans (NSW backlog) In reality target species already shown to be invasive

Prohibited Lists The declaration of species as noxious underpins policy aimed at regulating and preventing the introduction of species already identified as causing damage Do not deal with the potential of species to become invasive Focus of lists is on primary product sector The lists of prohibited species differ amongst the states and territories. Problems with border controls – the Prohibited Lists do not match Commonwealth ‘Permitted List’ for entry of species.

Strategies and Plans Some plans specifically developed to recover species will address abatement and recovery issues eg Mary River Cod Research and Recovery Plan Uptake varies. Eg Not all jurisdictions have adopted biodiversity strategies, with the Northern Territory and Western Australia still to settle theirs. Each strategy sets different targets for IAS Biosecurity Strategies do not deal with IAS already present in a jurisdiction Management and re-stocking plans for fisheries do not address recovery of threatened species.

IDENTIFY ACTUAL IAS IDENTIFY POTENTIAL IAS

4. RECOMMENDATIONS That States and Territories develop permitted lists of species; and That regulators investigate ways of making better use of existing resources.

Permitted Lists Alien species can only be imported once their safety has been evaluated. Permitted Lists operate in a preventative manner by stopping potentially harmful species from gaining entry. Lists can be harmonized nationally, leading to uniformity of regulation, Limitations – in similarity with prohibited lists they do not deal with IAS already present in a jurisdiction.

Better Use of Existing Resources Overlap between recovery and threat abatement can be exploited better: Identify KTPs by extrapolating information from recovery plans for threatened or endangered species. Adopt existing threat abatement plans, modified for local conditions