Species Management Plan
Downloadable File in MS Word format
Return to ANS Home page
Aquatic nuisance species (ANS) are a growing problem in Arizona. This document is an important step in the coordinated response to the problem and serves as an efficient means of communicating the scope of activities necessary to effectively address the issue. Several projects across the state have focused on isolated ANS plant and animal problems. The purpose of the Arizona State Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plan is to provide guidance on management actions to address the prevention, control and impacts of unwanted nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species that have invaded or may invade Arizona.
State, federal and international ANS authorities and programs are briefly discussed to provide an understanding of our current ability to regulate and manage ANS. The development of a state management plan, as called for in Section 1204 of the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-646) (NANPCA) provides an opportunity for federal cost-share support for implementation of the plan. Approval of this management plan by the national Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) Task Force is also required for Arizona to be eligible for federal cost-share support. Freshwater nonindigenous species that are known to have been found in Arizona are listed. Very little is known about the impact of many nonindigenous species and some have high commercial, recreational and aesthetic values. The plan identifies a small number of priority nonindigenous ANS that are considered to be highly detrimental, and worthy of immediate or continued management action. The management actions outlined in this plan concentrate on these priority species.
The goal of this plan is as follows:
To fully implement a coordinated strategy designed to prevent new unintended introductions of nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species into the Colorado River and inland waters of the state, to limit the spread of established populations of nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species into uninfested waters of the state, and to abate harmful ecological, economic, social and public health impacts resulting from infestation of nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species.
Section 1204 requires that this management plan "identifies those areas or activities within the state, other than those related to public facilities, for which technical and financial assistance is needed to eliminate or reduce the environmental, public health and safety risks associated with aquatic nuisance species." This plan focuses on the identification of feasible, cost-effective management practices and measures to be taken on by state and local programs to prevent and control ANS infestations in a manner that is environmentally sound. The three main goals identified in the plan are structured to be achieved through the implementation of strategic actions and tasks designed to solve specific problems. The plan will be periodically revised and adjusted based upon the practical experience gained from implementation, scientific research, and new tools, as they become available.
The implementation table summarizes the plan’s funding from all sources. Implementing the programs outlined in this plan will require a coordinated tribal, Federal, State and private effort, and the dedication of significantly greater funding than is currently available.
The introduction of non-indigenous aquatic nuisance species (ANS) into the lower Colorado River and the inland waters of Arizona threatens the ecological integrity of the state’s water resources, as well as economic, public health and social conditions within our state. Because they have few natural controls in their new habitat, ANS spread rapidly, destroying native plant and animal habitat, damaging recreational opportunities, lowering property values, clogging waterways, and impacting irrigation and power generation. The coordinated efforts contained within this plan are designed to protect the citizens of Arizona from the multitude of losses associated with ANS animals and plants. This plan focuses on eliminating the threat of accidental ANS introductions. The intentional introduction of nonindigenous species for aquaculture, commercial, or recreational purposes is addressed to insure that these beneficial introductions do not result in accidental ANS introductions, and to improve information sharing among those agencies responsible for regulating intentional introductions.
The introduction of nonindigenous species is not a new phenomenon in Arizona. Numerous species are causing or threaten to cause significant problems throughout the state, from the Colorado River on the north and the west to the San Francisco Drainage on the east, and in many of the reservoirs created in between. It is likely that nonindigenous species will continue to cause problems and damage across the state of Arizona. The reasons for this are obvious. With its many reservoirs and warm weather, Arizona is a popular vacationing spot for boaters from the East. This opens an easy method of transfer, especially for species such as the dreaded Zebra Mussel, which has not yet established in the state, but has been found on boats that have crossed the state from the east. For decades, sport fishing has brought numerous nonindigenous fish species into the state, from the eastern states and abroad. While restrictions now prohibit intentional introductions of many species, unintentional and illegal introductions will remain a concern. The growing aquaculture industry in the state as well as aquarium trade and backyard water gardening has brought many tropical aquatic species from around the world which easily become established in the warm climate that Arizona has yearlong. The alteration of Arizona watersheds with the building of reservoirs has altered the riparian habitat in many areas of the state, often in ways that favor nonindigenous species over those native and often endemic to the state.
The potential for significant additional appears great for Arizona. Various new species seem to be poised to enter Arizona without the establishment of proper prevention methods. Having eradicated the growth of purple loosestrife that occurred in the 1980s, Arizona is the lone state out of the continental US to not have an established population of the weed. Giant salvinia has invaded portions of the lower Colorado, but has not become established in any reservoirs that provide water to the majority of the state. Zebra mussels have been found on trailered boats entering California after crossing the state, but none have become established in state waters. Each of these species has the potential to cause costly environmental, ecological, agricultural and industrial impacts. If any of these non-indigenous species would become established in the reservoirs that feed the extensive canal system in Arizona, the impact on water users across the state could be widespread. These canals could provide a rapid means of transport to waters across the state, and the cost would be immense to eradicate invaders such as mussel and plants that may plug water intakes and pumping stations. Arizona therefore is in a unique position to focus efforts on prevention of several of these species that have caused losses in the millions of dollars for control.
Numerous ANS have been introduced and dispersed in the Colorado River and the inland waters of Arizona by various pathways. The environmental and socioeconomic costs resulting from ANS infestation will only continue to rise with further successful ANS introductions. Although an awareness of the problems caused by ANS is emerging, the solutions to these problems are not readily apparent. This comprehensive state management plan for nonindigenous ANS provides guidance on management actions to prevent, control and limit the impacts of ANS that have invade or may invade the Colorado River basin and inland waters.
Arizona’s ANS Management Plan will be reviewed and revised annually,
or more frequently if necessary. New ANS threats can arrive unexpectedly.
Advances in our knowledge of ANS management techniques could warrant alterations
in our management strategies. The specific tasks employed to accomplish
our goals and objectives must remain flexible to assure efficiency and
effectiveness. This version of the Arizona State ANS Plan is a good first
step towards identifying and integrating existing ANS programs, and implementing
new programs, but future editions will be necessary to fully accomplish
Non-indigenous Species Authorities and Programs
This section provides a brief discussion of non-indigenous species authorities and programs in Arizona State, as well as federal law and international agreements. Arizona State laws relating to non-indigenous species cannot be discussed without a basic understanding of federal and international authorities. The policies regarding non-indigenous species are controlled and enforced by a network of regulatory agencies and organizations. Not all state and federal laws relating to ANS are included in this section of the plan.
State Authorities and Programs
State and local efforts play a large role in controlling the spread of non-indigenous species. States have authority to decide which species can be imported and/or released. However, the United States Constitution vests the power to regulate international and interstate commerce to Congress. Federal law may preempt state law, but states retain almost unlimited power to define which species are imported and/or released. The state of Arizona currently has a number of statutory and regulatory authorities with which it addresses or potentially can address the issue of prevention and control of nonindigenous ANS. Additional information on regulated pathways of introduction for non-indigenous species can be found in Appendix D.
Arizona Animal Programs and Regulations
Currently the state restrictions concerning the regulation of non-indigenous animals are based on the movement of wildlife, especially when fishing. R12-4-313 and R12-4-316 both deal with the transport of baitfish, while R12-4-401 lists a number of restricted species, in regard to their movement and sale. This restricted list deals with many non-indigenous species, while R12-4-406 specifically lists the zebra mussel as restricted.
Arizona Plant Programs and Regulations
Few restrictions exist concerning the control of plants, especially aquatic plants in Arizona. R3-4-244 lists regulated and restricted noxious weeds that are present in the state and are being monitored or controlled. R3-4-245 lists prohibited noxious weeds that may not be transported into the state. Both of these laws include several threatening ANS. 3-205.01 gives the jurisdiction to control noxious weeds to the Arizona Department of Agriculture. This includes the right to quarantine areas, to call on land-owners to control noxious weeds and to update the noxious weeds list as necessary.
Current Known Gaps in Arizona State programs
All the state regulations and laws have been developed over time in response to individual target species and a variety of concerns as they arose. Therefore, there is not currently a comprehensive, coordinated and vigorously enforced policy framework to deal with problem species and their impacts. Clearly, one task must be to identify gaps within the state’s policies and statutes and to develop recommendations for improvements. Such improvements may entail developing new legislation and regulations, revising existing authorities, and developing methods for improving enforcement, coordination, and information dissemination regarding new or existing authorities.
The current federal effort regarding the management of ANS is a patchwork of laws, regulations, policies, and programs. At least twenty agencies currently work at researching and controlling non-indigenous species. The Federal Agencies Table in Appendix D outlines the responsibilities of a number of these government agencies and summarizes their current role in the control of introduced species.
Federal laws which apply directly to the introduction of non-indigenous species include the Lacey Act, the Federal Noxious Weed Act, the Federal Seed Act, the Non-indigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990, and the National Invasive Species Act of 1996. (The full text of these laws will not be included in this report.) The Endangered Species Act could also have indirect application if an ANS was shown to threaten the survival of a federally listed species, such as the humpback chub.
in the State of Arizona
A growing number of non-indigenous aquatic plant and animal species have adversely impacted the productivity and biodiversity of Arizona’s native species, and altered a variety of aquatic ecosystems. Most introductions are the result of human activities. There are many ways organisms may be transported. Major pathways through which nonnative species are introduced into inland and coastal waterways include aquaculture, aquarium trade, biological control (shoreline stabilization, agricultural uses), transport via recreational boating and fishing, research activities, and movement of nonnative species through channels and canals. Some pathways, such as the aquaculture industry, are currently regulated to minimize the risk of new ANS introductions, while other pathways have developed few or no precautions. Additional information regarding regulated pathways is listed in Appendix D.
Threatened Impact of Non-Indigenous Species
Potential threats may be evidenced by the degree of negative impact these species have upon the environment, industry and the economy. Negative impacts include:
Freshwater Animals and Plants
A draft list of freshwater non-indigenous animals in Arizona is included in Appendix B. The list is incomplete, since there is little published information non-indigenous aquatic species in Arizona. Currently, more funding and research is needed regarding the management and control of ANS animals. The freshwater ANS animals which are presently of most concern for Arizona include:
The zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) has not been found in Arizona waters to date, but it is considered to be a priority species due to the degree of impact it has had in the Great Lakes region to date, and with regards to its rapid westward spread. Zebra mussels have been found on trailered boats at Lake Pleasant and on boats that had crossed Arizona and were entering California.
Several other species of concern are those that could be spread by the pet trade that are native to warm areas and are injurious to humans. These species include piranha, alligators, snapping turtles and electric eels.
More detailed information on these priority species is included in Appendix C.
Invasive and aggressive non-indigenous freshwater weeds pose a serious threat to Arizona State waters. Several non-indigenous freshwater species are currently present in Arizona. Some cause serious problems; the impacts of others are still yet to be determined. The freshwater non-indigenous plant species found in Arizona are listed in Appendix C, along with information on pathways of introduction, more detailed information on priority plant species and their impacts.
Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata), Brazilian elodea (Egeria densa), and Parrotfeather (Myriophyllum aquaticum) are priority freshwater submersed species in Arizona.
Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) is a priority emergent species that has spread throughout the continental US, but has not yet become established in Arizona. We have the opportunity to work to exclude this ecosystem altering invader from our state. Saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima) is another priority emergent species that is rapidly taking over riparian areas around the state.
Giant Salvinia (Salvinia molesta) is a priority floating plant that is currently found only in the Lower Colorado River. This aquatic fern has had major impacts to slow moving waters in the southeast as well as around the world.
Priorities for Action
The purpose of the Arizona State Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plan is to coordinate all ANS management actions currently in progress within Arizona, and to identify and provide funding for additional ANS management actions, especially those relating to priority ANS plants and animals. This plan focuses on the priority species identified below, but the major focus will be to develop and implement new programs designed to prevent or control the introduction of the zebra mussel and the spread of Salvinia molesta. Arizona is currently lacking projects for preventing and controlling ANS animals.
Non-indigenous species considered to be priority species and worthy of immediate or continued management action include:
Goal I: Preventing new and unintended introductions of nonindigenous
aquatic nuisance species into the Colorado River and Arizona’s inland waters.
Goal II: Limiting the spread of established populations of nonindigenous
aquatic nuisance species into uninfested waters of the state.
Goal III: Abating harmful ecological, economic, social and public health impacts resulting from infestation of nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species.
Note, all italicized sections describe actions in progress.
Strategic Action IA: In partnership with cooperators, develop state-specific and regional listings of aquatic nuisance species that have the potential to infest Arizona’s waters. As part of this cooperative effort, identify existing and potential transport mechanisms that facilitate new ANS introductions.
Task IA1: Research and/or support research on the movement of aquatic nuisance species on a continental scale, and use findings to help predict potential ANS invasions into Arizona waters.
Strategic Action IB: Establish inter-jurisdictional approaches to facilitate legislative, regulatory and other actions needed for the prevention of new ANS introductions to Arizona’s waters.
Task IB1: Establish and support coalitions among cooperators, including ANS officials from the state and federal natural resource agencies, tribal groups, recreational boater and angler groups and other concerned resource users. Assist coalitions in promoting federal legislation and programmatic support for the prevention of new ANS introductions in the region/state.
Task IB2: Establish and support an inter-jurisdictional process to ensure compatibility and consistency between states and federal agencies.
Formed interagency committees on Salvinia molesta control, ANS control through the Western Interior 100th Meridian Plan.
Task IB3: Initiate and implement a regional approach through a regional weed management plan on Aquatic Nuisance Species to prevent new introductions of aquatic nuisance species into Arizona’s waters.
Strategic Action IC: Promulgate, publicize and enforce state legislation and regulations to prevent new ANS introductions into state waters.
Task IC1: Establish an interagency task force (with representation from public and private sectors) to develop regulations for state legislative consideration.
Task IC2: Develop and implement an outreach program that informs relevant groups of the regulations, their rational and compliance procedures.
Task IC3: Develop and implement enforcement programs.
Strategic Action ID: Develop/maintain monitoring programs to provide for early detection and prevention of infestations of aquatic nuisance species into unaffected watersheds.
Task ID1: Establish/participate in monitoring programs that emphasize partnerships between federal/state/local agencies; business/industry; academic institutions; and resource user groups. The feasibility of various technologies (e.g., Geographic Information Systems (GIS)) should be explored in designing such programs.
AZ is included in the 100th Meridian GIS currently in process showing Zebra mussel monitoring and marking any outbreaks, with possibility of layering other ANS into the same GIS. USGS has noxious weed GIS in process with multiagency reporting that could include aquatic weeds
Strategic Action IE: Conduct or support research regarding management options that will help prevent new introductions of aquatic nuisance species into Arizona’s waters.
Task IE1: Assess the transport mechanisms potentially responsible for new ANS introductions into Arizona’s waters. Develop preventive action plans to interrupt pathways of introduction.
Strategic Action IF: Conduct an effective information/education program on the prevention of new ANS introductions in Arizona’s waters.
Task IF1: Identify the relevant Arizona user groups (i.e. aquaculture business, recreational boating/angler groups, bait and tackle establishments, state agency stocking programs, nursery and landscape trades, aquarium and ornamental ponds, etc.) and secure representation from each group on an advisory team that takes an active role in the development of the ANS state management plan.
Task IF2: Develop information/education strategies for resource user groups identified as playing a significant role in ANS introduction. Information/education efforts should focus on the practices that can help prevent ANS transport and introduction into Arizona’s waters. As part of information/education initiatives, identify, when appropriate, the need for a regulatory approach in the prevention of ANS introductions.
ANS information placed in AGFD Fishing and Boating regulations Fishing tournament managers including education on spread of ANS as a part of tournament activities. Noxious aquatic weeds included in herbicide applicators classes.
Task IF3: Establish monitoring/tracking programs to evaluate the effectiveness of information/education efforts.
Problem: The spread of established populations of nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species into uninfested state waters is largely via human activity, such as boat transfers, bait handling, water transport, and ornamental and landscape practices. Limiting the spread of such populations is problematic due to the numerous pathways of dispersal, the complex ecological characteristics associated with ANS populations, and the lack of feasible technology that is needed to limit the spread. Many public and private resource user groups are not aware of existing infestations of ANS in the Colorado river and its reservoirs, the Verde and Salt Rivers, and inland waters of Arizona, and why they cause priority problems locally, regionally and beyond. The probability of ANS spread to other waters can increase when resource user groups are not aware of how their routine activities can cause the dispersal of ANS into uninfested water bodies. An information/education program is needed to provide information on why the spread of ANS populations needs to be limited, how the ANS populations can be reduce, and also the value of a healthy aquatic ecosystem that supports a diverse native aquatic community. Information/education programming is also critical to strengthening public/private support for and statewide participation in ANS management strategies. It is also difficult to manage the spread of ANS since infestation frequently occurs in watersheds that occupy more than one state. Cooperation among states in the Colorado River watershed sharing ANS infested watersheds is needed to implement consistent management strategies that will effectively limit the spread of ANS populations.
Strategic Action IIA: Identify and prioritize aquatic nuisance species whose spread should be limited.
Task IIA1: Establish an advisory group, with representation from all stakeholders affected by the ANS problems in the state, to guide in the selection of aquatic nuisance species that merit management.
Task IIA2: Develop and implement a process to prioritize those aquatic nuisance species that merit management. (Note: An assessment of ANS impacts discussed under Goal III is recommended for this process. Also, a recommended resource to facilitate this prioritization process is the National Park Service publication, Handbook for Ranking Exotic Plants for Management and Control (see literature citations).)
Also note Arizona Department of Agriculture noxious weed laws divide weeds into three groups. Regulated noxious weeds are found within the state and are to be controlled to prevent further infestation or contamination. Restricted noxious weeds are found within the state and are to be quarantined to prevent further infestation or contamination. Prohibited noxious weeds are prohibited from entering Arizona and shippers must have a permit to transport them through the state.(Rules for abatement published in Arizona Administrative Code R3-4-243 and R3-4-245.
Strategic Action IIB: Monitor the spread of ANS determined to be a state priority.
Task IIB1: Design a monitoring program to provide information that will help in developing an effective strategy to limit the spread of selected ANS populations. A network approach, including federal/regional/state/local agencies, public/private groups and academic institutions, is recommended. Variables to monitor include population size, structure and range; rate of growth; type of habitat; distribution; impacts on native species; and economic and other impacts on human communities.
Basic boat monitoring for zebra mussels is being done in Glenn Canyon. Monitoring of lower Colorado River at least biannually by USFWS using established protocol.
Task IIB2: Develop identification materials for each aquatic nuisance species that is being monitored to facilitate participation of all stakeholders.
Informational pamphlets have been created for Eurasian water milfoil, hydrilla, Salvinia molesta, and zebra mussels. Signs warning of spread of ANS have also been created for placement at marinas, boat ramps and docks.
Strategic Action IIC: Develop and implement management strategies to limit the spread of each aquatic nuisance species determined to be a state priority.
Task IIC1: Based on identified dispersal pathways, develop voluntary and regulatory approaches to limit the spread of aquatic nuisance species. Also, identify the best available technology for each management strategy and include an environmental impact assessment, where necessary.
Glenn Canyon boat surveys. Tried voluntary boat checks along 100th meridian, but with a low success rate Seminar for DPS employees encouraging random boat checks and increased awareness
Task IIC2: Implement a watershed approach to limit the spread of aquatic nuisance species within the state.
Task IIC3: Establish cooperative policies among the Colorado River Basin States sharing watersheds to limit the spread of ANS populations.
Strategic Action IID: Inform and educate the appropriate resource user groups on the management strategies needed to limit the spread of targeted ANS populations. To support this effort, the target groups should be informed on how the spread of aquatic nuisance species threatens the health of a diverse native aquatic community, and other harmful ANS impacts. Volunteer groups, such as lake associations and outdoor recreation groups, should be actively involved in these outreach efforts.
Task IID1: Assess existing ANS information/education programs (i.e., Sea Grant, cooperative extension, state natural resource agencies). Build on the strengths and address the weaknesses of these programs.
Task IID2: Identify pathways that disperse aquatic nuisance species (i.e., recreational boaters/anglers, commercial and sport fishers, bait handling, water transport, ornamental and landscape practices) and inform these groups on practices to help limit the spread. This outreach program should focus on changing the behavior of user groups to limit the spread of targeted ANS populations to Arizona’s waters.
Arizona Department of Agriculture has contacted several nurseries in the Phoenix area, bass tournament groups are cooperating, information in boating and fishing regulations as previously mentioned.
Task IID3: Coordinate with state and local programs to ensure, where appropriate, that public access projects and interpretive displays include information about aquatic nuisance species.
Bulletins on ADA website, UA extension website, informative pamphlets and signs are being dispersed.
Task IID4: Establish monitoring/tracking programs to evaluate the effectiveness of information/education efforts.
Strategic Action IIE: Promulgate, publicize and enforce state regulations to limit the spread of aquatic nuisance species within the state.
Task IIE1: Establish an interagency task force (with representation from public and private sectors) to develop regulations for state legislative consideration.
Task IIE2: Develop and implement an outreach program that informs relevant groups of the regulations and why they exist, and compliance procedures.
Task IIE3: Develop and implement enforcement programs.
ADA procedure: can eradicate restricted noxious weeds and charge land or commodity owners for the cost of treatment. Property liens can be imposed to recover cost.
Strategic Action IIF: Support/coordinate scientific research between state and federal agencies and academic institutions that investigate potential management strategies to limit the spread of ANS populations and associated environmental impacts.
Task IIF1: Prioritize research needs to help in establishing program structure.
Task IIF2: Conduct priority research, or promote the conduct of such research via federal research initiatives, academia or the private sector.
Research on use of Clearigate done in PVID drain, BOR Denver office also researching chemical use, USDA APHIS in CA testing weevil as biological control, UA to test use of grass carp and tilapia as biological control pending facilities inspection.
Task IIF3: Develop a technology transfer program to be used in distributing research findings.
Problem: The infestation of ANS in the Colorado River and inland state waters can alter or disrupt existing relationships and ecological processes. Without co-evolved parasites and predators, some nonindigenous aquatic species out-compete and even displace aquatic native plant or animal populations. As part of this process, the invading species can also influence to some extent the food webs, nutrient dynamics, and biodiversity of the ecosystems. To abate the ecological impacts of the invading organism, it is necessary to understand the mechanisms by which the species disrupts the natural balance of the ecosystem. The Colorado, Verde, and Salt Rivers and inland waters of Arizona provide valuable economic benefits for Arizona, some of which include potable water supplies, irrigation water, commercial and sport fisheries, recreational use, and water usage by manufacturers, industry and electric power companies. Some introduced ANS to the Colorado River Basin/state have provided economic benefits, such as those supporting the aquaculture business and sport fishing industry. However, several ANS have been found to cause adverse economic impacts. For instance, the Eurasian watermilfoil forms thick mats on the surface of water which can interfere with many types of water recreational activities, such as swimming and water skiing, as well as potentially clogging irrigation canals and water intakes.
Organisms invading the Colorado River Basin and inland state waters can threaten public health through the introduction of disease, concentration of pollutants, contamination of drinking water, and other harmful human health effects. An extensive abatement system for these ANS needs to be established to prevent human health problems from occurring in the waters of Arizona. These control strategies must also be designed so as not to cause significant environmental impacts.
Strategic Action IIIA: Assess the ecological, socio-economic and public health impacts of aquatic nuisance species in Arizona’s waters. Use this assessment as guidance to develop action levels that warrant implementation of control strategies (Note: Consult New York State's Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) management plan for a useful assessment of ANS impacts (i.e., beneficial, innocuous, nuisance, detrimental), which may helpful in determining action levels for control. Also, a recommended resource to facilitate this process is the National Park Service publication, "Handbook for Ranking Exotic Plant for Management and Control".
Task IIIA1: Identify and assess the damages of aquatic nuisance species that threaten the ecological health of Arizona’s ecosystems.
Task IIIA2: Identify and assess the damages of aquatic nuisance species that threaten public safety and/or human health of the state's residents.
Task IIIA3: Identify and assess economic costs for each aquatic nuisance species causing damage to water users.
CAP estimates that a zebra mussel infestation would increase operational and maintenance costs $4-5 million annually.
Strategic Action IIIB: Based on the above impact assessments, develop and implement control strategies, including physical, chemical and biological mechanisms, to eradicate or reduce populations of targeted aquatic nuisance species in the Colorado River and inland state waters (i.e., those aquatic nuisance species identified by the state as causing detrimental ecological, economic, social and/or public health impacts).
Task IIIB1: Establish protocols that will provide guidance in designing and implementing control strategies.
Task IIIB3: Establish mechanism(s) to ensure that the control strategies developed and implemented by the state are done so in coordination with federal agencies, tribal authorities, local governments, inter-jurisdictional organizations and other appropriate entities (NANPCA, Section 1202).
Task IIIB4: Establish mechanism(s) to ensure that the control strategies are based on the best available scientific information and conducted in an environmentally sound manner (NANPCA, Section 1202).
Strategic Action IIIC: Conduct an information/education program providing information on ANS impacts and related control strategies. Utilize existing groups/programs responsible for information dissemination when appropriate.
Task IIIC1: Design programs targeting public agencies needed in promoting management action to abate impacts; user groups needed for effective control of targeted species; and communities that need to learn how to live with aquatic nuisance species problems.
Task IIIC2: Establish monitoring/tracking programs to evaluate the effectiveness of information/education efforts.
Planned Efforts Implementation Table
Arizona ANS Management Plan
Planned Efforts Implementation Table
|Coop. Organ.||Recent Efforts
|Number||Descriptive Title/Brief Summary||
|SA IA||Develop regional listings of ANS that may impact
Identify transport mechanisms that may facilitate ANS introductions.
|I A1||Research large-scale movements of ANS to help predict new invasions.|
|SA IB||Create an inter-jurisdictional ANS task force.|
|I B1||Create an ANS task force or committee of stakeholders.|
|I B2||Create and encourage inter-jurisdictional networking to cooperatively combat ANS in a consistent and fair manner.|
|I B3||Form regional enforceable weed management areas for established and predicted ANS invasions.|
|SA IC||Promulgate, publicize and enforce state legislation and regulations to prevent new ANS introductions into state waters.|
|I C1||ANS task force will develop regulations for state legislation.|
|I C2||Begin an informational campaign to share concerns, regulations and responsibilities with stakeholders.|
|I C3||Develop and implement enforcement programs|
|SA ID||Develop/maintain monitoring programs of Arizona waters for early detection and prevention.|
|I D1||Establish monitoring programs involving concerned citizens, agencies and industry, assimilating results into Geographical Information Systems (GIS) maps.|
|SA IE||Conduct or support research of preventative management options.|
|I E1||Assess ANS transport mechanisms and develop action plans to interrupt pathways of introduction.|
|SA IF||Conduct a public educational program on the prevention of new ANS introductions.|
|I F1||Form stakeholder advisory team that takes an active role in the ongoing development of the ANS management plan.|
|I F2||Target resource user groups with educational programs focused on helping prevent ANS transport and introduction.|
|I F3||Establish and administer questionnaires to evaluate the educational program effectiveness.|
|SA IIA||Identify and prioritize ANS whose spread should be limited.|
|II A1||Establish stakeholder advisory group to aid in selecting priority ANS.|
|II A2||Develop and implement a process to prioritize those ANS that merit management.|
|SA IIB||Monitor the spread of those ANS deemed to be a state priority|
|II B1||Design a monitoring program to provide information that will help in developing an effective strategy to limit the spread of selected ANS populations.|
|II B2||Develop a key/informational paper for each monitored ANS.|
|SA IIC||Develop and implement management plans to limit the spread of priority ANS.|
|II C1||Develop voluntary and regulatory approaches to limit the spread of ANS, including an environmental impact assessment where necessary.|
|II C2||Identify state watersheds and address ANS issues of each watershed.|
|II C3||Establish cooperative ANS prevention and control policies among the Colorado River Basin States.|
|SA IID||Inform and educate resource user groups on the management strategies needed to limit the spread of targeted ANS populations.|
|Assess the ecological, socio-economic and public health impacts of ANS in Arizona’s waters|
|Quantify the damages ANS that threaten the ecological health of Arizona’s ecosystems.|
|Quantify the damages of ANS that threaten public safety and/or human health of the state's residents.|
|III A3||Identify and assess economic costs for each aquatic nuisance species causing damage to water users.|
|SA IIIB||Develop and implement control strategies to eradicate or reduce populations of priority ANS in the Colorado River and inland state waters.|
|III B1||Establish protocols that will provide guidance in designing and implementing control strategies.|
|III B2||Support/coordinate scientific research that investigate potential control strategies and associated environmental impacts. Develop an information/technology transfer program for findings.|
|III B3||Establish mechanism(s) to ensure coordination
with all appropriate authorities (NANPCA,
|III B4||Establish review board to ensure that the control strategies are based on sound environmental science (NANPCA, Section 1202).|
|SA IIIC||Conduct an information/education program providing information on ANS impacts and related control strategies.|
|IIIC1||Design programs targeting public agencies needed in promoting management action to abate impacts; user groups needed for effective control of targeted species; and communities that need to learn how to live with aquatic nuisance species problems.|
|III C2||Establish monitoring/tracking programs to evaluate the effectiveness of information/education efforts.|
Accidental introduction: an introduction of non-indigenous aquatic species that occurs as the result of activities other than the purposeful or intentional introduction of the species involved, such as the transport of non-indigenous species in ballast water or in water used to transport fish, mollusks, or crustaceans for aquaculture or other purposes.
Aquatic nuisance species: a plant or animal species that threatens the diversity or abundance of native species, the ecological stability of infested waters, or commercial, agricultural, aquacultural, or recreational activities dependent on such waters. (Note: for the purposes of the State management plans, reference to an aquatic nuisance species will imply that the species is non-indigenous.)
Baitfish: fish species commonly sold for use as bait for recreational fishing.
Control: limiting the distribution and abundance of a species.
Cryptogenic species: a species that may or may not be indigenous to an area.
Ecological integrity: the extent to which an ecosystem has been altered by human behavior; an ecosystem with minimal impact from human activity has a high level of integrity; an ecosystem that has been substantially altered by human activity has a low level of integrity.
Ecosystem: the biological organisms in an ecological community and the non-living factors of the environment.
Environmentally sound: methods, efforts, actions, or programs to prevent introductions or to control infestations of ANS that minimize adverse environmental impacts. The impact of management actions should be less than the impact of the ANS.
Eradicate: the act or process of eliminating an aquatic nuisance species.
Exotic: (same as non-indigenous) any species or other variable biological material that enters an ecosystem beyond its historic range, including such organisms transferred from one county to another.
Intentional introduction: all or part of the process by which a non-indigenous species is purposefully introduced into a new area.
Non-indigenous species: any species or other variable biological material that enters an ecosystem beyond its historic range, including such organisms transferred from one country to another .
Pioneer infestation: a small ANS colony that has spread to a new area from an established colony.
Priority species: an ANS that is considered to be a significant threat to Washington waters and is recommended for immediate or continued management action to minimize or eliminate their impact.
Watershed: an entire drainage basin including all living and nonliving components
Appendices and References
Section 1204 of the National Invasive
Species Act of 1996
SEC. 1204. STATE AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES MANAGEMENT PLANS.
Arizona Aquatic Nuisance Species Management Plan
Public Review Information
TO CONTAIN INFORMATION COVERED IN PUBLIC MEETINGS OF INVOLVED STAKEHOLDERS
FOR RATIFYING THE PLAN
Non-indigenous Aquatic Species in Arizona
List of Non-indigenous Freshwater Animal Species found in Arizona
Common name Species name
African clawed frog Xenopus laevisBullfrog Rana catesbeiana
Mountian treefrog Hyla eximia Tiger salamander Ambystoma tigrinum Pacific chorus frog Pseudacris regilla Rio Grande leopard frog Rana berlandieri Fish American eel Anguilla rostrata American shad Alosa sapidissima Arctic grayling Thymallus arcticus bighead carp Hypophthalmichthys nobilis bigmouth buffalo Ictiobus cyprinellus black bullhead Ameiurus melas black buffalo Ictiobus niger black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus blue catfish Ictalurus furcatus bluegill Lepomis macrochirus blue tilapia Oreochromis aureus brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis brown bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus brown trout Salmo trutta channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch common carp Cyprinus carpio convict cichlid Cichlasoma nigrofasciatum cutbow trout Oncorhynchus clarki x mykiss cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki driftwood catfish Parauchenipterus galeatus fathead minnow Pimephales promelas firemouth cichlid Cichlasoma meeki flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas goldfish Carassius auratus grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idella green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus green swordtail Xiphophorus helleri golden trout Oncorhynchus aguabonita guppy Poecilia reticulata largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides leatherside chub Gila copei longjaw mudsucker Gillichthys mirabilis Mexican tetra Astyanax mexicanus Mexican molly Poecilia sphenops mosquitofish Gambusia affinis mottled sculpin Cottus bairdi mountain sucker Catostomus platyrhynchus muskellunge Esox masquinongy Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus northern pike Esox lucius plains killifish Fundulus zebrinus pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus quillback Carpiodes cyprinus rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss redbelly tilapia Tilapia zillii redear Lepomis microlophus red shiner Cyprinella lutrensis redside shiner Richardsonius balteatus Rio Grande cichlid Cichlasoma cyanoguttatum Rio Grande sucker Catostomus plebeius rock bass Ambloplites rupestris Sacramento perch Archoplites interruptus sailfin molly Poecilia latipinna sand shiner Notropis ludibundus shortfin molly Poecilia mexicana silver carp Hypophthalmichthys molitrix smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu smallmouth buffalo Ictiobus bubalus sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka spikedace Meda fulgida spotted bass Micropterus punctulatus spotted tilapia Tilapia mariae striped bass Morone saxatilis suckermouth catfish Hypostomus sp. tench Tinca tinca threadfin shad Dorosoma petenense Utah chub Gila atraria variable platyfish Xiphophorus variatus walleye Stizostedion vitreum Wami tilapia Oreochromis urolepis warmouth Chaenobryttus gulosus woundfin Plagopterus argentissimus white bass Morone chrysops white crappie Pomoxis annularis white sturgeon Acipenser transmontanus yellow bass Morone mississippiensis yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis yellow perch Perca flavescens Invertebrates Asian clam Corbicula fluminea big-ear radix Radix auricularia Chinese mysterysnail Cipangopaludina chinensis malleata crayfish Orconectes causeyi crayfish, red swamp Procambarus clarkii crayfish, virile Orconectes virilis red-rim melania Melanoides tuberculatus shrimp, riverine grass Palaemonetes plaudosus zebra mussel Dreissena polymorpha ReptilesAmerican alligator Alligator mississippiensis
alligator snapping turtle Macroclemys temminckii
false map turtle Graptemys pseudogeographica
red-eared slider Trachemys scripta elegans
slider Trachemys scripta
snapping turtle Chelydra serpentina
southern painted turtle Chrysemys picta dorsalis
spectacled caiman Caiman crocodilus
spiny softshell Apalone spinifera
Texas spiny softshell Apalone spinifera emoryi
water monitor Varanus salvator
western painted turtle Chrysemys picta bellii
yellowbelly slider Trachemys scripta scripta
yellow mud turtle Kinosternon flavescens flavescens
List of Non-indigenous Freshwater Plants
Common Name Scientific Name Habitat AZDA Status
Plants that are currently causing problems in Arizona
Brazilian elodea Egeria densa submersed species
curly leaf pondweed Potamogeton crispus submersed
giant salvinia Salvinia molesta floating in calm waters
hydrilla Hydrilla verticillata submersed species
parrot-feather Myriophyllum aquaticum mat-forming emergent
grows along lake and river
water-cress Nasturtium officinale cold water streams
Plants with Apparent Limited Distribution and Weedy Potential
Eurasian water-milfoil Myriophyllum spicatum submersed species
Species of Concern Being Sold in Arizona, But Not Established in the Wild
water-hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes floating plant with dangling roots (sold as an aquatic garden plant)
Introduced Plant Species, But Not Causing Problems
dotted duckweed Landoltia (Spirodela) punctata floating leaved in shallow water
yellow floating-heart Nymphoides peltata floating leaved in shallow water
Species Of Concern in Other States, Not Yet Introduced to Arizona
Anchored water hyacinth Eichhornia azurea (SW)
Water-chestnut Trapa natans L.
List of Arizona Game and Fish Restricted Non-indigenous
Freshwater Animal Species of Concern
Common name Species name
clawed frogs all species of the genus Xenopus giant or marine toads Bufo horribilis, Bufo marinus, Bufo paracnemis Fish Arctic grayling Thymallus arcticus bass all the species of the family Serranidae bighead carp Hypophthalmichthys nobilis bony tongue Arapaima gigas bowfin Amia calva catfish all species of the family Ictaluridae Crucian carp Carassius carassius electric eel Electrophorus electricus European whitefish Leuciscus idus, Idus idus freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens freshwater stingray all species of the family Potamotrygonidae gars all species of the family Lepisosteidae goldeye all species of the family Hiodontidae herring all species of the family Clupeidae Indian carp all of the species Catla catla, Cirrhina mrigala, and Labeo rohita lampreys all species of the family Petromyzontidae mooneye all species of the family Hiodontidae Nile perch all species of the genus Lates pike all species of the family Clupeidae pike topminnow Belonesox belizamus piranha all species of the genera Serrasalmus, Serrasalmo, Phygocentrus, Teddyella, Fooseveltiella, and Pygopristis Rudd Scardinius erythrophthalmus shad all species of the family Clupeidae except threadfin shad, species Dorosoma petenense sharks all species, marine and freshwater of orders Hexanchiformes, Heterodontiformes, Squaliformes, Pristiophoriformes, Squatiniformes, Orectolobiformes, Lamniformes, and Carcharhiniformes silver carp Hypophthalmichthys molitrix snakehead all species of the family Ophicephalidae South American parasitic catfish all species of the family Trichomycteridae and Cetopsidae sunfish all species of the family Centrarchidae tetras all species of the genus Astyanyx tiger fish Hoplias malabaricus trout all species of the family Salmonidae white amur, grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idella walking catfish all species of the family Clariidae walleye Stizostedion vitreum white perch Morone americanus yellow perch Perca flavescens Invertebrates Asiatic mitten crab Eriocheir sinensis Crayfish, Australian all species of family Parastacidae zebra mussel Dreissena polymorpha Reptiles caimans crocodiles all species of order Crocodylia alligators snapping turtles all species of family Cherlyridae sea snakes all species of family Hydrophiidae Priority Species
Non-indigenous Species Authorities and Programs
Federal Agencies Regulating the Transport of Live Aquatic Products
Federal Agencies Regulating the Transport of Live Aquatic Products (Olson and Linen 1997).
Restrict Movement Into U.S. Restrict Interstate Movement Content or Labeling
Plants APHIS APHIS APHIS
DOD AMS AMS
Fish FWS FWS FWS
Invertebrates APHIS APHIS FWS
List of abbreviations and descriptions of authority (Olson and Linen 1997)
AMS The Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of agriculture, works closely with states in regulating interstate seed shipments. Regulations require accurate labeling and designation of "weeds" or "noxious weeds" conforming to the specific state’s guidelines.
ARS The Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, the research branch of USDA, conducts and funds research on the prevention, control, or eradication of harmful exotic species often in cooperation with APHIS. Projects include aquaculture techniques and disease diagnosis and control.
DEA The Drug Enforcement Agency restricts imports of a few non-indigenous plants and fungi becouse they contain narcotics substances.
DOD The Department of Defense has diverse activities related to non-indigenous species. These relate to its movements of personnel and cargo and management of land holdings. Armed forces shipments are not subject to APHIS inspections. Instead, the DOD uses military customs inspectors trained by APHIS and the Public Health Service.
FWS The Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, has responsibilityfor regulating the inportation of injurious fish and wildlife under the Lacey Act. Maintains a limited port inspection program. In 1990, FWS inspectors inspected 22 percent of the wildlife shipments at international ports of entry. Interstate movement of state-listed injurious fish and wildlife is a federal offense and therefore potentially subject to FWS enforcement. Also provides technical assistance related to natural resource issues and fish diseases to state agencies and the private sector (aquaculture in particular). Helps control the spread of fish pathogens.
NOAA and NMFS The National Oceanic and Atmosphieric Association and National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, inspect imported shellfish to prevent the introduction of non-indigenous parasites and pathogens. Cooperative agreements with Chile and Australia; Venezuela has requested a similar agreement.
PHS The Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human services, regulates entry of organisms that might carry or cause human disease.
Customs Customs Service, U.S. Department of the Treasury. Customs personnel inspect passengers, baggage, and cargo at U.S. ports of entry to enforce the regulations of other federal agencies. They inform interested agencies when a violation is detected and usually detain the suspected cargo for an agency search.
USCG The Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Treasury, was given certain responsibilities under the Non-indigenous Aquatic Prevention and Control Act of 1990, relating to preventing introductions (mostly dealing with ballast water exchange).
The Non-indigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990
The Non-indigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 created the Interagency Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force. This group is required to develop a program to prevent, monitor, and control unintentional introductions of exotic species. Many of the agencies that in some way regulate the introduction of species are represented on this task force.
The National Invasive Species Act of 1996
The National Invasive Species Act of 1996 re-authorizes and amends the Non-indigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (the "Zebra Mussel Act"). It expands the scope of the Act beyond the zebra mussel and ballast water and begins to "address introductions and infestations of [non-indigenous aquatic] species that may be as destructive as the zebra mussel." To this end, the Act authorizes a Western Regional Panel to identify priorities for the western region; develop emergency response strategies for stemming new invasions; and advise public and private sectors concerning the prevention and control of exotic species. Furthermore, the Act advises state and Tribal governments to prepare invasive species management plans and provides for ecological surveys to study species attributes and patterns of invasions.
Finally, the National Invasive Species Act of 1996 authorizes U.S. spending $1.25 million to "fund research on aquatic nuisance species prevention and control in San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Coast."
The expanded scope of the National Invasive Species Act of 1996 demonstrates that federal efforts to control the transport and accidental release of exotic species are becoming more stringent. Concern over the disastrous spread of the zebra mussel has heightened public awareness of the issue and, as a consequence, government regulations are likely to become more developed in coming years.
International Instruments Addressing Non-indigenous Species
Additional International Agreements Addressing Non-indigenous species include:
Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force (D. James Baker, Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and Mollie Beattie, Director of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 1994. Report to Congress: Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations of the Intentional Introductions Policy Review.
Carlton, J.T. 1985. Transoceanic and Interoceanic Dispersal of Coastal Marine Organisms: The Biology of Ballast Water. Oceanography and Marine Biology, An Annual Review: volume 23.
Hushak, L.J., Y. Deng, M. Bielen. 1995. The Cost of Zebra Mussel Monitoring and Control. ANS Digest: volume 1, number 1.
Leigh, P. 1994. Benefits and Costs of the Ruffe Control Program for the Great Lakes Fishery. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Report.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Fish and Wildlife. 1993. Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Comprehensive Management Plan.
Ohio Sea Grant College Program. 1995. Sea Grant Zebra Mussel Report: An Update of Research and Outreach: 1988-1994. The Ohio State University.
Olson, A.M., and E.H. Linen. 1997. Exotic Species and the Live Aquatics Trade. Proceedings of Marketing and Shipping Live Aquatics ’96: conference and Exhibition, Seattle, Washington, October 1996. School of Marine Affairs, University of Washington, Working Paper No. 6.
Ruiz, G.M., A.H. Hines, L.D. Smith, J.T. Carlton. 1995. An Historical Perspective on Invasion of North American Waters by Nonindigenous Aquatic Species. ANS Digest: volume 1, number 1.
U.S. Congress, Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990, Public Law 101-646.
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. 1993. Harmful Nonindigenous Species in the United States. OTA-F565.
U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. 1991. Handbook for Ranking Exotic Plant for Management and Control. Authored by R.D. Hiebert and James Stubbendieck. (Copies of this report (Natural Resources Report NPS/NRMWRO/NRR-93/08) are available from: Publications Coordinator, National Park Service, Natural Resources Publications Office, P.O. Box 2587 (WASO-NRPO), Denver, CO 80225-0287).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. 1995. Report
to Congress: Great Lakes Fishery Resources Restoration Study.