WILD

Heart of the global wilderness conservation movement.

  • Home
  • Our Vision
    • About
    • History
    • Nature Needs Half
  • How we work
    • Action
    • Publishing & Arts
    • Convening
    • Policy & Management
    • Intergenerational
    • Training & Capacity Building
  • Where we work
    • Wild Africa
    • Wild Asia
    • WILD Europe
    • Wild Latin America
    • Mind & Heart
    • Wild North America
  • World Wilderness Congress
    • History
    • Accomplishments
    • WWC Chronicles
    • WWC Publication Archive
  • WILD Interactive
    • Blog
    • E-leaf Newsletter
    • Forum
    • Multimedia
  • Support WILD
    • Donate
    • Finances & Effectiveness
    • Creative Ways to Give
    • Legacy Giving
    • Publications & Gear Store
    • Contact Us
  • DONATE NOW
Subscribe

by RSS by Email


Connect with WILD

Facebook MySpace YouTube Twitter


Join Email List
For Email Marketing you can trust

Back to WILD Blog

About

Learn More about our Blog, and who’s behind it.

Categories
  • Books, Magazines & Other Publications
  • Climate Change
  • Communications & Media
  • Field Notes
  • Ian Player Perspectives
  • Intergenerational Blog
  • Mali Elephant Blog
  • Native People & Traditional Cultures
  • Nomkhubulwane Blog
  • PhotoBlogs
  • Policy & Politics
  • Wilderness Designations
  • Wilderness Experience
  • Wildlife
  • WWC

Resolution 11: Protecting maritime wilderness parks from aquatic nuisance species /La protección de parques de áreas silvestres marítimas contra la transferencia de especies acuáticas fastidiosas de buques lastrados

November 12,2009 by Emily Loose

Download: English / Spanish

Discuss this resolution on the WILD Forums >

• WHEREAS—Ballast contaminated with invasive non-indigenous aquatic nuisance species is a primary vector for invasive species transfers globally and within freshwater systems via commercial ships;

• WHEREAS-In the US alone, past invaders, such as zebra mussels and quagga mussels, are wrecking havoc with aquatic ecological systems and have control costs in the billions of dollars annually, and many other countries are experiencing similar crisis;

• WHEREAS-introduced NIS have been cited as the second largest threat to endangered species after habitat loss (Wilcove and Chen 1998).

• WHEREAS- this issue has languished without resolution sine the 1970s when the scientific community began reviewing the problem in detail. In the late 1980s, Canada and Australia were among countries experiencing particular problems with unwanted species, and they brought their concerns to the attention of IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC). The scope of the issue continues to expand.

• WHEREAS- International agreement on the methods to treat ballast under the International Maritime Organizations has only been signed by 18 out of 30 countries (representing only 18% of the 35% of the tonnage needed in total for ratification) http://www.imo.org/Conventions/mainframe.asp?topic_id=867 http://www.imo.org/Conventions/mainframe.asp?topic_id=247;

• WHEREAS- The United States Coast Guard is in the process of evaluating standards more stringent then the IMO treaty;

• THEREFORE—the Wild9 Congress urges the remaining countries to sign the IMO treaty at a minimum and continue to support research and development of technology to further reduce the transfer of invasive species beyond current proposed IMO standards. In addition, until treatment is mandated by IMO or individual countries, the international wilderness community encourages voluntary sterilization of ballast for ships that discharge ballast within or near national parks and marine sanctuaries or during emergency situations where release is imminent.

• BE IT RESOLVED—that by January 30, 2010 a letter on behalf of the congress will be sent to the Presidents of the Countries who have not sign the IMO treaty to encourage them to do so; and by December 3, 2009 a letter on behalf of the congress to the US Coast Guard encouraging them to set the highest standard of protection for US marine parks and sanctuaries that the delegates agree to(recommend supporting alternative 5 of their draft Environmental impact statement which is complete sterilization at the earliest possible implementation datehttp://www.regulations.gov , and enter docket #USCG-2001-10486), and to bring the phased implementation of these standards on line as soon as possible.

• PROPOSER—Phyllis A. Green National Park Service Isle Royale National Park

• SECONDERS-

Robin Reilly, Heart of the Continent Partnership, Private citizen

Bruce Hamilton, Deputy Executive Director, Sierra Club

  • email
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
Share:
  • email
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
Posted in: Talking WILD
Comments: 0 (Post Comment)

Post your Comment here





Comments are the sole responsibility of their authors. WILD is not responsible, nor will be held liable, for blog comments. WILD reserves the right to delete any comment that is abusive, profane, rude, or considered spam.



Copyright Disclaimer Privacy Statement Bylaws & Articles of Incorporation Terms of Use Contact Us Site Map

We give special thanks to the numerous professional and amateur photographers, many of them from the International League of Conservation Photographers, who generously donate the use of their images. © 2003 – 2012 The WILD Foundation