Protect Our Precious Waterways Presentation Group 11

Protect Our Precious Waterways:Stopping the invasion

Introduction• Utah Society for Aquatic Protection (USAP)• Concerned about the future of Utah’s waterways• Presenting to the Utah Division of Wildlife

Resources regarding Quagga and Zebra Mussels• Mussels cause significant damage to waterways

and threaten every potential water recreation activity

Quagga MusselsPhoto credit:USFWS

Zebra Mussels

Photo credit: USFWS

The history of the invasion

Context and Background

The Migration• Zebra and Quagga mussels were originally found

in Eurasia• Transported by boats and water equipment• Arrived in the US via infested ships in 1989• As an invasive species, they spread across the US

like wildfire• Some waterways in the Eastern US are now

contaminated beyond repair

The Damage• Mussels attach themselves to anything solid• They clog water intakes and cover boats, docks,

water shores, etc.• Removal is extremely expensive

Parker Dam Intake on the Colorado

Mussels on the Outdrive of a Vessel

Utah Aquatic Invasive Species Management

• The Utah Department of Wildlife Resources has found species in Utah• Sand Hollow Reservoir: Infested• Red Fleet Reservoir and Electric Lake: Detected

• Something must be done

The current situation

Description and Critique of the Pre-existing Policies or Programs

Current Policy• Utah’s current policy is very basic• Very basic prevention attitude• Monitoring• Education• Conservation officer training• Self-certification• Makes it illegal to transport invasive species between

bodies of water

Self-Certification• Recommends that all boaters clean, drain, dry,

and inspect their boats• Warns boaters to be prepared to fill out a

certification form that uses the honor system to show that a self inspection was completed

The Disadvantages• Self-certification is based on the honor system and

has little enforcement • Decontamination of boats is only highly

recommended – There is no law• Current policy is not aggressive • Mandates education, training, and monitoring• Does not mandate that the invasion is halted

Other State’s Policies• Potential action at Lake Pueblo in Colorado• Removing mussels by hand• Lake drawdown: lowering the level of water in the lake• These actions are not plausible

• Current Colorado policy calls for mandatory boat inspections, but it is too late to save Lake Pueblo from the invasion

• Virginia: Millbrook Quarry• Pumped 174,000 gallons of potassium into the lake• The action was effective, but…• Efficiency?• Cost?• Impacts?

The Consequences: What Works?• States with a policy similar to Utah’s say it does

not work• Education does little to halt the invasion• Water usage fees can possibly change the

attitudes of water users but they are not enough• Mandatory inspections only work if they are

restrictive and are accompanied by other methods• Lake Powell

How can we fix the problem?

The Alternatives

The Alternatives• Alternative A: Mandatory inspection stations• Alternative B: Tax for All• Alternative C: Widespread prevention, inspection

and education approach

Alternative A: Mandatory inspection stations• Create mandatory inspections for all vehicles

transporting water vessels at locations deemed necessary by the DWR

• Inspection stations would be free• Every station would have at least two inspectors• Data would be collected for every vessel and

would be used to track the vessel’s use on waterways across the US

Alternative A: Mandatory inspection stations

Advantages• Basic system• Studies have shown

this approach to be useful

Disadvantages• Basic system• Funding would be cut

from other programs• Could hinder the

formation of other programs by the DNR

Alternative B: Tax for All• Implement a water use tax for every citizen of

Utah• Taxes would be used to fund an inspection system• All Utah residents would be required to pay for

prevention• Infected waterways would be shut down• Boaters would be required to obtain a license • Demonstrate safe operation of a vessel• Demonstrate knowledge of invasive species prevention• Demonstrate proper decontamination and inspection of a

vessel

• As with Alternative A, water use data systems would be used

Alternative B: Tax for All

Advantages• Effective and funded

Disadvantages• Utahans would be

against a state-wide tax

• Boaters would resist licensing

Alternative C: Widespread prevention, inspection and education approach

• Tax usage for all individuals launching a vessel on Utah’s waterways

• Tax would be collected from the sale of vessel registration stickers

• Registration stickers would be tracked electronically by scanning a bar code to view vessel’s use on infected waters

• Data collected could also be used to monitor the effectiveness of the program

• Revenue from the tax would only be used to fund the zebra and quagga mussel prevention policy (education, mandatory inspections, etc.)

• Place inspectors and inspection stations at every waterway in Utah

• No watercraft may launch when the inspection stations are closed

Alternative C: Widespread prevention, inspection and education approach

Advantages• Comprehensive

program• Implements multiple

methods of prevention

Possible Disadvantages

• Requires recreationists to pay

Conclusion• Three alternatives• Alternative A: Mandatory inspection stations• Alternative B: Tax for All• Alternative C: Widespread prevention, inspection and

education approach

• Utah is in peril of losing water recreation abilities• Current policy is not effective• Policy must be amended • We recommend using Alternative C to implement a

cohesive and comprehensive policy that reverses the current predicament

• Change can not wait: we must halt the invasion now!

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure!