Chemical control strategies
Mechanical control strategies
Biological control strategies
Control strategies
CIONA MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
No action
Prevention strategies
Adaptation strategies
Note: For the sake of simplicity, only strategies we identified as viable were included in this framework. This presentation is meant as a complement to
our report and not to stand alone. As such, please find references, unviable strategies, calculations, and further explanation in our report.
UV-B radiation
Vibration
Electroshock
Mechanical control strategies
Air-drying
Vacuum removal
Manual removal
Home
Acetic Acid (vinegar)
Tolylfluanid
Dichlofluanid
Sodium Hypochlorite (60ppm)
Hydrated Lime
Brine
Pseudoalteromonas tunicata
Chemical Control Strategies
Chlorothalonil
TBT
Fresh Water (15C)
Sea-Nine 211
Irgarol 1051
Fresh Water (40C)
Home
Pseudoalteromonas
tunicata
Periwinkle
Sea Urchin
Littorina littorea
Echinodermata sp.
Not effective on mussel lines
Effectiveness unclear
Other
Grazers
Biological Control Strategies
Data Deficient
Passive Predator
Predators
Lunar Snail
Sea Star
Mitrella lunata
Asteria sp.
Rock Crab
Green Crab
Cancer irrotatus
Carcinus maenas
Invasive Species
Home
Ballast Water Regulations
Processing Plant Effluent
Prevention Strategies
Voluntary Industrial Guidelines - SAECOP
Rapid Response
Mandatory Boat Cleaning
Close off bay
Monitoring
Public Awareness and Education
I&T Licensing
Home
Turbulent
water
Compost
Stronger/thicker lines
Thicker lines
Turbulent water
Food
Adaptation Strategies
Pharmaceutical uses
Compost
Capital intensive mussel
farming
Biodegradable socking
technology
Home
Benefits:
Research questions:
•Economic lost of infected lines
•How do mussel farmers value future (discount rate)
•Environmental and social costs of the invasion.
•Population dynamics research
None
No Action
Costs:
Rate of spread between bays:
-1 new valuable river/bay
infected per year (the mussel
aquaculture value of a river/bay
is 1,132,742 $).
High uncertainty: Based 1
invasion of an other solitary
tunicate (clubbed tunicate) in
PEI.
Rate of spread within a bay:
-Year 1: 5% of maximum extent
-Year 2: 10% of maximum extent.
-Year 3: 25% of maximum extent.
-Year 4: 50%, of maximum extent.
-Year 5: 100%, maximum extent of invasion is reached.
High uncertainty: New spread in PEI, not a lot of data
available. Partially based on clubbed tunicate invasion in PEI.
Economic lost of
infected lines:
- about 75% of the
value of infected
lines is lost.
High uncertainty:
Highly variables
between lines. Not a
lot of data.
Discount rate:
- 10%.
Low uncertainty:
Preferences of mussel
farmers have not been
investigated, But 10%
discount rate is often
used in economic
analysis.
Cx = V*S*x*W*L*(1-P)/(1+D)x-2 + E
Cx: Costs of not acting for a specific year ($).
V: Average mussel aquaculture value of a river/bay ($/bay).
S: Rate of spread between bays of C. intestinalis (bay/year).
x: Number of years since 2004 – first appearance of C. intestinalis (year).
W: Rate of spread within a bay (%).
L: Economic lost in invaded areas (%).
P: Probability of C. intestinalis population collapse (%).
D: Discount rate (%).
E: Environmental and social costs of not acting ($).
Estimated cost of not acting for 2006 = 340 000$
Estimated cost of not acting for 2006-2010 = 340 000$ + 700 000$ + 1 350 000$ + $ + 1 850 000$ + 2 250 000 = 6 490 000$
Home
Within a bay / between
lines & leases
Between bays
Probability of
population crash
Offshore
Minimum
acceptable
population
reduction
Environmental
tolerance
Rate of spread
Competition
with mussels
Probability of
population crash
Environmental
tolerance
Offshore
Within a bay /
between lines
& leases
Between bays
& offshore
Rate of spread
Adaptation
Environmental
tolerance
No Action
Population dynamics
research
Minimum
acceptable
population
reduction
Control
Frequency of
treatment
Prevention
Minimum
acceptable
population
reduction
Frequency of
treatment
Mechanical
Biological
Minimum
acceptable
population
reduction
Chemical
Timing of treatment
Minimum
acceptable
population
reduction
Timing of
treatment
Timing of
treatment
Frequency of
treatment
Predation effects
Home
Linkages:
-Compost adaptation (disposal)
-Complementary strategies
Benefits:
-75-80% removal (effort-dependent)
(~0% effective on juveniles)
Manual removal
Costs:
-75 ¢/m2 (labour) (~$240/line[1])
-Disposal costs
3-4 removal events/season (req. to keep at a ‘minimum’
as defined by individual N.S. farmers).
Uncertainties:
-Best application times
-Effectiveness on juveniles
estimated at 0.
Research questions:
-More exact measurements of manual removal rate
-Research into avenues/costs of disposal (eg. Composting, filtering back
into water column, etc.)
-Population dynamics research
Uncertainties:
-Removal rate is density dependent (sq m/day
has high uncertainty)
-Disposal costs
-Frequency required
-Necessary level of reduction for manageability
Mechanical Control Strategies
Linkages:
-Complementary strategies
Benefits:
75-80% removal
(effort-dependent)
~236 kg/day removal
Vacuum removal
-19-40 ¢/m2 (labour) (~$60-128/line)
-Pump cost
-Disposal costs
Unknown if effective on
mussel lines.
Uncertainties:
-Effectiveness uncertain
(timing, mortality, damage
to mussels)
Costs:
Research questions:
•Holding strength of tunicates and mussels on the lines
•Alternative techniques (eg. above water)
•Population dynamics research
Uncertainties:
-Removal rate is density
dependent (sq m/day has
high uncertainty)
-Disposal costs
-Pump costs
-Frequency required
-Minimum acceptable
population reduction
Mechanical Control Strategies
Linkages:
-Combination with pressure washing
Benefits:
Air-drying
~90-100% removal
Costs:
-$250/line (labour & gas)
-Infrastructure costs
Only effective on
removable structures
Uncertainties:
-Removal uncertain
-Feasibility uncertain
Research questions:
•Alternative methods of lifting/drying
lines (currently prohibitive because of
line weights)
•Population dynamics research
Uncertainties:
-Costs uncertain
-Infrastructure required
-Frequency required
-Timing of treatment
-Minimum acceptable
population reduction
Mechanical Control Strategies
Linkages:
-Combination with air-drying
Benefits:
Pressure washing
-$250/line (labour & gas)
-$70-100/washer
~90% removal
Only effective on
removable structures
Uncertainties:
-Feasibility uncertain
Costs:
Research questions:
•Population dynamics research
Uncertainties:
-Timing of treatment
-Frequency required
-Minimum acceptable
population reduction
Mechanical Control Strategies
Effectiveness:
Cost:
-$0.70/L (Glacial)
-$0.39/L (Photographic grade)
-Cost of application (labour, transport)
Uncertainties:
-Costs of application (eg.
fuel, labour)
Acetic Acid (vinegar)
Research questions:
-Population dynamics research
-95% effective/treatment
-Increased effectiveness with
longer exposure time
Uncertainties:
-Diff. effect on diff. life stages?
-Minimum acceptable population
reduction
-Frequency required
-Timing of treatment
Chemical control strategies
Cost:
< $0.01/L
Chlorothalonil
Research questions:
-Population dynamics research
-Environmental impacts
-Effect on adults
Effectiveness:
EC50embryonic=33ug/L
EC50larval=42ug/L
Uncertainties:
-Effect on adults
-Environmental impact
-Frequency required
-Timing of treatment
-Minimum acceptable
population reduction
Chemical control strategies
Linkages:
-Adaptation: lowering lines
-Population dynamics research
-Complimentary strategies
-Monitoring / vector management
(prevention)
Effectiveness:
11 tunicates consumed per crab per
day maximum
364 days for one crab to clean off
one sock
(gross underestimate)
Cost:
$0.52-0.60 per crab (landing price)
+ Cost of lower lines
(Bonus: cost may be offset by market for crab
meat)
Most effective in winter?
(Sept 2006: 20 tonnes of crab dumped
into Montague R. leases)
Uncertainties:
-Are there crabs available for lower
than landing price?
-Cost of lowering lines and associated
uncertainties
-Benefit from crab meat market
Rock Crab
Research questions:
•Population dynamics research
•Crab population dynamics research
•Sustainable population?
•Population size and structure
•Actual field ingestion rate by crabs
•Ecosystem effects of inc. crabs
•Problems with harvesting/marketing crabs with tunicatebased diet?
Uncertainties:
-Effect on mussels
-How many crabs needed for a certain
tunicate reduction
-Frequency of treatment (How often are
more crabs needed?)
-Timing of treatment
-Minimum acceptable population reduction
-Diff. effect on diff. life stages?
-Interaction with other species
Biological control strategies
Voluntary Industrial
Guidelines - SAECOP
Benefits:
Cost:
Low
-To PEI-AA:
costs of administration
costs of communication with
stakeholders: $3400/yr
-Reduction of spread
-Coordination btw stakeholders
-To boaters
$100 for copy of guidelines
Uncertainties:
-% of farmers adhering
-Speed of industry response to
different degrees of infestation
-Reduction of spread
Uncertainties:
Research questions:
-Administration costs
-Degree of reduction of spread
-Population dynamics research
Prevention strategies
Uncertainties:
-% of individuals who do not apply for licenses
-Probability of spread being contained or
reduced by eliminating anthropogenic vectors?
-Uncertain if enforcement exists
-% of infractions
Benefits:
-Reduction of spread
-Number of license applications/yr
-Enforcement
-Coordination between stakeholders
Costs:
Uncertainties:
Low
Costs: (per bay)
-Lost business dependent
upon if transfer between
bays is necessary
-To government:
Notification: ~$3400
Subcommittee operation: low
Low: ~ $9,500
-Labour: $6000
-Infrastructure and equipment: $2000 (fixed)
-Transportation: $1,500/yr
-Communication with stakeholders; website
updated by coordinator: low
-To boaters:
Lost business (inability to move): high
Submission of paperwork: low
Lost profit due to time delay: low
Benefits:
High
Monitoring
-Identify new invasions more rapidly
-Reduction of spread
-Increased possibility to identify I&T
license infractions
-Early detection: lower costs of eradication
I&T Licensing
Rapid
Response
Uncertainties:
-What percentage of
boaters surveyed? How
accurate are estimates?
-Reduction of spread
Research questions:
-Population dynamics research
Benefits:
High
-Decreased uncertainty re:
fisheries regulations
-Decreased costs of
enforcement of mandatory
regulations
-Decreased biofouling and
transfer between bays
Uncertainties:
-Accuracy of population
survey
Research questions:
-Population dynamics research
Public
Awareness and
Education
Costs:
~$10,500 (low)
-Signs: $5000
-Labour: $2100/yr
-Communication: $3400/yr
Prevention strategies
Uncertainties/Research
questions:
-Percent reduction in total
spread by filtration alone
(versus treatment and
filtration).
Benefit:
-Prevention of spread of adults
-Filter does not screen objects
smaller than 750 microns.
Research questions:
-Ongoing research about costs
and benefits of low salinity
treatment
-Population dynamics research
Uncertainties:
-Egg and larvae density at
different stages of
processing
Costs, benefits:
Uncertain
Treatment
(for eggs and larvae)
Filtration
(for adults/juveniles larger
than 750 microns)
Processing Plant
Effluent
Costs:
$71,000 + maintenance (low)
Costs breakdown:
-Equip: 1 yard mesh (750 microns) = ~$37.00
-Filter: $16,000
-Maintenance labour: $1200/yr
-Replacement costs
-Disposal: $10,000/yr
Uncertainties:
-Most costs are estimates,
uncertainty could be
reduced.
-Possibility that extra
facility is needed for
filter space ($10-50,000).
Prevention strategies