Minutes of the Interagency Task Force on Invasive Aquatic Plants and Nuisance Species

Meeting Minutes, Thursday, October 30, 2008

Bolton Hill Facility, Augusta , Maine

Introductions and Action Items from Previous Meeting

After introductions, John McPhedran ran through action items from the April 2008 meeting. Following are updates on those action items.

-Russell Danner commented that Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (DIFW) is starting to draft legislation to deal with nuisance fish.

-Roy Bouchard thought that the criteria for listing invasive aquatic plants would be ready for Task Force (TF) final review at the spring 2009 meeting.

-Following Dan Buckley's suggestion to have a central list of invasive species, Roberta Hill of the Volunteer Lake Monitoring Program's Center for Invasive Aquatic Plants (VLMP/CIAP) announced that VLMP/CIAP has posted a “central list of invaders” on their website.

-Regarding requiring public water supply (PWS) written consent for rotenone treatment in any PWS under an eventual rotenone general permit, Mary Jane Dillingham commented that there are approximately 54 PWS in Maine . There has been no further work on the general permit but DIFW still hopes to develop a general permit and get it approved by Maine Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).

There was extended discussion of challenges in responding to nuisance fish infestations, specifically in the arctic char water Big Reed Pond. DIFW has captured char from the pond and placed them in a hatchery while they apply for a waste discharge license from DEP to apply rotenone to kill introduced smelt.

Dale Pierson asked if the effort to reclaim the pond will achieve success and if it is worth the effort. Joe Dembeck of DIFW replied that char distribution in the state is limited (14 waterbodies) and there is a high risk of extirpation of this species from the state. Since smelt introduction could happen in other char waters, DIFW needs to attempt control at Big Reed, formerly a premier char fishery, to build the State's arctic char program. Danner concurred and said that DIFW has determined the Big Reed project is worth the effort. He added that the real difficulty is making sure that no downstream waters are impacted by the rotenone treatment.

Scott Williams and Becky Linney asked about the duration of rotenone toxicity. Danner responded that 2 parts per million will kill fish and that this must be diluted 10-fold to have no effect. Breakdown is due to solar radiation. DIFW prefers to treat in the fall such that organisms are killed all winter long until spring warmup. Under this scenario the rotenone is gone by spring. DEP is asking for summer application of rotenone which would result in an approximately 2-week breakdown. But complete kill of cold-blooded organisms is difficult in summer due to stratification.

DIFW's goal is to apply rotenone to Big Reed in fall 2009. Dembeck offered to present on DIFW invasive fish work to TF at Spring 2009 meeting.

Action: Dan Buckley will review and comment on the “central list of invaders” which will be posted on VLMP/CIAP's website. McPhedran will send link to Buckley and TF when VLMP/CIAP posts it, likely in early 2009.

Invasive Species Program Review

McPhedran presented DEP's Invasive Aquatic Species Program's funding source, expenditures, and priorities and briefly summarized DEP's response to the discovery of Eurasian watermilfoil in Salmon Lake ( Belgrade ) in August 2008.

Buckley suggested that the TF needs to consider a voluntary sticker (discussed at previous meetings) because there will be no significant net gain with the merger of the boat registration and existing Lake and River Protection Sticker. McPhedran suggested that the TF reconsider the voluntary sticker idea at the spring 2009 meeting since 2008 revenue figures are not final. Dale Pierson commented that high gas costs will reduce the number of boaters coming to Maine .

Inspections and Cost Share Grants

Peter Lowell of Lakes Environmental Association (LEA) in Bridgton discussed LEA's contract with DEP to administer the Courtesy Boat Inspection (CBI) Program and to provide small grants for local prevention and control programs. Lowell said that he knew the state's efforts faced flat funding several years ago and added that now we need to move forward carefully; municipal funds will also be tighter. He suggested that cooperators under contract with the state should compare hourly and in-kind match rates used in contracting. Lowell detailed LEA's major contract items with DEP. Currently LEA has spent $223,211 out of the $225,399 contract.

Joel Bloom asked which groups received the additional $500 for plant removal efforts reference by Lowell . Lowell will forward that information to Bloom.

Ann Gibbs asked Lowell what changes he's recommend to the program. Lowell responded that the CBI program is very successful, although it is hard to get large number of volunteers and most lake groups now have paid inspectors. The program is simplified from its earlier years and seems to run on its own. There is little demand for training.

There was additional discussion of the CBI Program and cost share grants for local groups including:

Providing a list of out-of-state infested lakes to boat inspectors would be helpful
Lowell reported that local groups matched $355,000 for $121,000 state funds thus far in 2008
The need for meaningful assessment of control projects to ensure that money spent is achieving desired results and not making the infestation worse

Lowell concluded by advocating for more funds for plant control in infested lakes to reduce the spread risk from infested waters and said it's not fair for local groups to raise considerable sums of money to take care of state waters.

Early Detection (Invasive Plant Patrol (IPP) Training)

Roberta Hill of VLMP/CIAP described work done under their contract with DEP including:

313 volunteers trained at 16 IPP workshops in 2008; ~1800 trained since 2002
103 plants identified in 2008
352 lakes surveyed by end of 2007

Hill said that interest in the IPP program continues to grow. DEP funds constitute ~43% of all VLMP/CIAP funds.

There was discussion about how to sustain an ongoing IPP effort after training is complete. Suggestions included paid IPPs (Friends of Cobbossee Watershed considering this), the need for direct contact with/between VLMP/CIAP and local groups to maintain interest, and using paid regional coordinators (if an active volunteer point person is lacking). Great East Lake on the ME/NH border was noted as a model local IPP program.

In response to Gibbs' question about changes she'd recommend, Hill said that the program is becoming more efficient over time but that there's still the need to get more people (IPPs) on the water. She noted the need to help local groups develop invasive plant management plans and suggested that the VLMP/CIAP's Moosehead Project is a model for jump-starting early detection programs on lakes of statewide significance that are currently under-monitored.

Additional discussion about the Early Detection included:

Do not let-up prevention/early detection network; VLMP/CIAP doing a great job
Need CBI program at Moosehead; could coordinate so that public ramps get regular IPP survey
DIFW biologists could quickly check ramps for plants when they launch boats
Need to prioritize ramps for IPP surveying based on risk of spread

Priorities for DEP's Sticker Funds

There was general agreement that DEP should not shift funds from prevention and early detection efforts into plant control projects (comments by Buckley, Williams, Gibbs). Buckley and Gibbs agreed that additional funding (beyond existing sticker funds) is needed for control projects since this is a growing problem with insufficient funding. Buckley also said that the TF should advise state agencies that more funds are needed. Pierson noted that it is easier to raise funds for specific projects. Gibbs said that targeted plant control in certain lakes can be integral to a comprehensive prevention effort.

Peter Lowell suggested that we need to look for opportunities to collaborate and explore other funding sources. To that end, Lowell added that major cooperators should meet together to work through contract details for 2009. Pierson suggested that 1 or 2 TF members try to attend and suggested that the discussion be function-based, i.e., how can we get the most out of the program?

Additional discussion about funding included:

The questionable philanthropic climate given the economic downturn
Potential for reestablishing federal funds for invasives
Need for plant management planning to consider all aspects, including funding, and to look beyond individual lakes to a watershed or regional scale (e.g., PRISM model in NY State)

Action: Discuss voluntary sticker at spring 2009 meeting.

Action: Peter Lowell to forward to Joel Bloom list of groups receiving extra $500 for plant removal.

Action: DEP to hold joint meeting to discuss 2009 program with VLMP/CIAP and LEA; TF will be notified of and invited to this meeting (will be held in January 2009).

State Action Plan for Managing Invasive Aquatic Species (Plan)

The Task Force discussed reviewing and revising the Plan. The TF agreed that this should be a minor revision as opposed to a major redraft. The revision will address the Action Plan proper (pp. 18-32) and will not include the Introduction and Maine's Approach portions of the Plan. The TF agreed to these next steps:

1. DEP will send the Action Plan to agencies for their final review by mid-November (done 11/3).

2. DEP will incorporate the agency recommendations only (i.e., not the agency comments) into the Action Plan .

3. DEP will send the Action Plan (electronically) with recommendations to cooperators (per McPhedran's list on meeting notes) coincidental with a press release regarding the process. Along with the Action Plan , DEP will send a cover letter explaining the process and attach a cover page to the Action Plan with the proposed update of Tasks. Cooperators will have 30 days to review the Action Plan .

4. DEP will present a summary of changes to the Action Plan at the Milfoil Summit in late February.

Actions: See 1-4 above.

Potential Agenda Items for Spring 2009 Meeting

Issues surrounding nuisance fish spread prevention and management: Joe Dembeck, DIFW (25 mins)

-This agenda item led to a discussion on education and outreach on invasive fauna (to curb illegal stocking and aquarium dumping) and flora (the need to distinguish between native and nonnative milfoils)

State Action Plan revision process: update on changes to plan based on public comment and possible approval of revisions by Task Force

Update on plant listing criteria

Voluntary sticker

(Also cake , to celebrate a birthday and an anniversary)

Next meeting

Thursday, April 16 at Bolton Hill Facility in Augusta

Action: Agencies to send brief update of activities to John McPhedran for distribution prior to TF members prior to the meeting.

Public Comment

None

Carryover action items from previous meetings

Action: John McPhedran will post TF information on DEP website prior to April 2009 meeting.

Action: Dan Buckley will draft an outline of components of the central list of invaders. è As noted above, Buckley will review the “central list of invaders” on VLMP/CIAP's website.

Action: Task Force to consider idea of voluntary sticker. è Agenda item for April 2009.

Minutes prepared by John McPhedran