Invasive Alien Species

Dear All,

Considering paragraph 5 of decision 14/11 which describes that an Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group,...to ensure timely provision of advice on achieving Aichi Biodiversity Target 9, you may wish to post your experiences related to the following elements of Target 9.

(1) Invasive alien species are prioritized
(2) Pathways of invasive alien species are prioritized
(3) Invasive alien species are controlled or eradicated
(4) Invasive Alien Species introduction pathways are managed

The Secretariat wishes to collect experts' views on the progress of (1)-(4) with examples of success and failure if any. The Secretariat believes that such information is relevant to facilitate the discussion on the development of the tools at the AHTEG meeting, what has worked and what needs to be improved. The information is relevant to the implementation of measures beyond 2020.

Looking forward to continuing posting.

Best wishes,
Junko

Kind regards,
Junko

Hi Junko and All,

As IMO is a regulatory body and its work on IAS is about the prevention of the transportation of any and all IAS, the relevant elements for us are (2) and, primarily, (4).

As you know, shipping is a potential pathway for the transfer or invasive aquatic species through two major vectors, ballast water and hull biofouling. The former is regulated by the globally binding 2004 BWM Convention, which is in force for two years now and currently has 81 Parties corresponding to just over 80% of the world's fleet, while for the latter there is no mandatory instrument but we have the 2011 Biofouling Guidelines.

With regard to the BWM Convention, we currently have what is called the experience-building phase (EBP) running through 2023, which aims to identify any issues with, or arising from, the implementation of the Convention, ultimately leading potentially to an evidence-based overhaul of the Convention. The EBP's scope does include ballast water sampling and analysis. Data submission from our Member States to us (IMO Secretariat) is expected to start very soon and to continue for the next few years as above.

As for the Biofouling Guidelines, it was recently decided that they will be reviewed during 2020 and 2021 to evaluate their uptake, effectiveness and any necessary improvements. This evaluation includes, inter alia, any observed change in level of biofouling from implementation of the Guidelines. Submissions from our Member States (and NGOs) are known to be in preparation and expected shortly.

Therefore, while we don't have any findings yet on either front, we hopefully will over the next few years and we will of course be updating SCBD (and other partner organisations) in the Inter-agency Liaison Group on Invasive Alien Species, as always.

In the meantime, the main point is that shipping as an IAS introduction pathway is certainly managed! (and, while its management may not be perfect, any weaknesses in the relevant framework are being investigated with a view to any necessary further action)

Best regards,
Teo
(Head, Marine Biosafety, Marine Environment Division, IMO)