Dear Conference Participants,

On behalf of the entire steering committee, I am pleased to welcome you to thissymposium exploring the use of genetically modified organisms as a biocontrolfor aquatic invasive species.

The goal of this meeting is to better understand the issues surrounding thedevelopment and use of this new technology. Experts in a variety of fields,ranging from biotechnology to environmental risk assessment and regulatoryissues, are represented. We are especially delighted to have Daniel Simberlofffrom the University of Tennessee as our keynote speaker during Tuesdayʼssymposium dinner.

We have planned a program aimed at exploring the full range of issues surroundingthis new technology. Monday is focused on the development of genetic biocontroltechnologies. You will review the status of genetic biocontrol technologies, includingchromosome-based, gene-based, and other targeted methods. Presenters will offerinformation about combining genetic biocontrol methods with other control methodsbefore you discuss genetic biocontrol research needs in small break-out groups.

Tuesday is focused on environmental risk assessment of genetic biocontrol applications. You will hearpresentations and contribute to discussions about environmental risk assessment with an emphasis on earlyrisk assessment steps, the status of the science, research needs, and methods for stakeholder deliberation.The small break-out groups will begin formulating a research agenda for environmental risk assessment.

Wednesday is focused on regulations and economics affecting the technology and the risk assessmentprocess. You will learn about the regulatory and economic contexts governing the development and applicationof genetic biocontrol technologies. The small break out groups will identify economic and regulatory issues andneeds affecting the future of genetic biocontrol.

Another symposium feature is our half-day writing session on Thursday during which the results from thesmall break-out groups will be integrated into three synthesis papers. These papers will be led by RonThresher, Keith Hayes, Robert Devlin, and Jennifer Kuzma, but if you are interested in taking the results ofthe symposium one step further, we welcome your participation.

The steering committee would like to thank a number of sponsors without whom this symposium would nothave been possible. These include U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Minnesota Sea Grant, the Great LakesProtection Fund, Dartmouth College, the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (formerly the Murray Darling River Basin Commission), the Mississippi River BasinPanel on Aquatic Nuisance Species, the University of Minnesota Introduced Species and Genotypes IntegrativeGraduate Education and Research Traineeship Program, Gila River Basin Native Fishes ConservationProgram, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service CAP Transfer Program, and USDAʼs Biotechnology Risk AssessmentGrant Program. On behalf of the symposium sponsors, steering committee, support staff, and everyone whohas contributed to this event, I hope that you enjoy the symposium.

Anne R. KapuscinskiSherman Fairchild Distinguished Professor of Sustainability Science, Dartmouth CollegeFormer Sea Grant Extension Specialist, University of Minnesota

Purpose and Objectives .................................................................. 3

Agenda ............................................................................................ 4 - 6

Keynote Speaker – Daniel Simberloff ............................................ 7

Speaker Bios ...................................................... ............................ 7 - 14

Session Abstracts ........................................................................... 15 - 21

Sponsors ......................................................................................... 22 - 23

Steering Committee ........................................................................ 23

GGeenneettiicc BBiiooccoonnttrrooll ooff IInnvvaassiivvee FFiisshhInternational Symposium on

June 21-24, 2010

2 3

Purpose: To discuss prospects and risks associated with managing invasive finfish and mussels with geneticbiocontrol strategies and to provide decision support for future genetic biocontrol endeavors.The world's leading experts will engage in a highly interactive scientific exchange about the genetic biocontrolof invasive fish. This first-time-ever symposium will help to build a shared understanding of genetic biocontrolissues and to stimulate new collaborations. The International Symposium on Genetic Biocontrol of Invasive Fish is a step toward turning geneticbiocontrol methods into practical tools. The symposium is designed to create opportunities for fisheriesmanagers, scientists, government regulators, industry representatives, and others with interests in the use ofgenetic biocontrol to:• Review the status of genetic biocontrol technologies with a focus on invasive finfish.• Create a framework for conducting risk assessments before genetically modified organisms are released into

the environment. • Discuss opportunities for stakeholders to contribute to developing and assessing genetic biocontrol technologies.• Examine the regulatory context for genetic biocontrol of invasive fish and mussels.• Consider the economic impacts of aquatic invasive species and of genetic biocontrol technologies.• Develop a plan to guide further research.

The International Symposium on Genetic Biocontrol of Invasive Fish is hosted by The University ofMinnesota Sea Grant Program and Dartmouth College.Cover photograph courtesy of Chris J. Benson.

Time Session Speaker(s)

8:00 Welcome, Overview of the Symposium Anne Kapuscinski, Dartmouth College

8:15 History of the Issue Paul Barrett, U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceRon Thresher, CSIRO Australia

8:45 Chromosome-based: Sterilization Tillmann Benfey, University of New Brunswick,Canada

9:15 Chromosome-based: Trojan Chromosome John Teem, Florida Department of Agriculture andConsumer Services, Division of Aquaculture

9:55 BREAK

10:25 Gene-based: Deleterious Gene Spread Ron Thresher, CSIRO AustraliaPeter Grewe, CSIRO Australia

11:15 Gene-based: Techniques from Insect Pest Control Fred Gould, North Carolina State University

11:45 Other Gene Target Methods Weiming Li, Michigan State University

12:25 LUNCH

1:45 Process Description Facilitators

2:00 Integrated Pest Management of Invasive Fish and Mussels

Peter Sorensen, University of MinnesotaRon Thresher, CSIRO Australia

2:40 Public Perspectives on GMO Development Leah Sharpe, University of Minnesota

3:00 BREAK

3:30 Break-out Groups: Key Points for Technology Research Agenda All participants

5:00 END OF DAY 1

Monday – Focus: Development of Genetic Biocontrol Technologies

GGeenneettiicc BBiiooccoonnttrrooll ooff IInnvvaassiivvee FFiisshh ((AAGGEENNDDAA))International Symposium on

4 5

Time Session Speaker(s)

8:00 Recap of Day 1, Setup for Day 2 Brian Stenquist, Founder/Director, MeetingChallenges consulting firm

THE BASINS AND THEIR INVASIVES:

8:30 Colorado River Basin Paul Marsh, Marsh & Associates, LLC

8:50 Laurentian Great Lakes Jeff Gunderson, Minnesota Sea Grant

9:10 Mississippi River Basin Michael Hoff, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

9:30 Murray-Darling Basin Jim Barrett, Murray-Darling Basin Authority

10:00 BREAK

10:30 Risk Assessment Methodology - Major Steps Keith Hayes, CSIRO Australia

11:40 LUNCH

1:00 Early Steps in Environmental Risk Assessment Anne Kapuscinski, Dartmouth College

1:30 Research Methods for Assessment Endpoints Robert Devlin, Fisheries and Oceans Canada

2:00 Problem Formulation and Options Assessment Kristen Nelson, University of Minnesota

2:40 BREAK

3:00 Break-out Groups Divided by Basin x Invasive xTechnology: Key Points for ERA Research Agenda All participants

5:00 END OF DAY 2

7:00

Keynote Dinner Speaker (Day 2) – Daniel Simberloff, University of Tennessee-KnoxvilleWinner - Eminent Ecologist Award from the Ecological Society of AmericaTopic: New methods needed, but will natural selection kill the Trojan fish?

Location: Courtyard Ballroom

Tuesday – Focus: Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) of Genetic Biocontrol Applications

Time Session Speaker(s)

8:00 Recap of Day 2, Setup for Day 3 Brian Stenquist, Founder/Director, MeetingChallenges consulting firm

8:30 Introduction to the Regulatory Context Anne Kapuscinski, Dartmouth College

8:35 National Level – U.S.A.Stephanie Showalter, National Sea Grant Law CenterBryan Arroyo, U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceLarisa Rudenko, U.S. Food and Drug AdministrationCenter for Veterinary Medicine

9:30 National Level – Australia Wayne Fulton, Freshwater Invasive AnimalsCooperative Research Centre, Australia

9:55 International Level – Cross-Border Concerns Kathryn Garforth, Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety,Canada

10:30 BREAK

11:00 State Level – Minnesota Luke Skinner, Invasive Species Program, MinnesotaDepartment of Natural Resources

11:20 State Level – Arizona Larry Riley, Arizona Game and Fish Department

11:50 LUNCH

1:10 Economics: Evaluating Market and Non-MarketCosts of Invasive Fish

Frances Homans, University of MinnesotaBrian Leung, McGill University, Canada

2:00 Break-out Groups: Key Points for RegulatoryResearch Agenda All participants

3:30 BREAK

4:00 Wrap-up of Symposium – Plenary Discussion led by Brian Stenquist, Meeting Challenges consulting firm

5:30 END OF DAY 3

Wednesday – Focus: Regulatory and Economic Contexts Affecting Technology Development & ERA

Time Session Speaker(s)

8:30 – 12 noon

Working groups on research agenda papers:(1) Technology research agenda(2) ERA research agenda(3) Regulatory research agenda

Lead co-authors of papers

Thursday – Focus: Developing Research Agenda Papers

6 7

Bryan ArroyoAssistant Director, Fisheries and Habitat Conservation, U.S. Fish and WildlifeService, Washington, D.C.Bryan Arroyo is the Assistant Director for the Fisheries and Habitat Conservation, having previously heldthe position of Assistant Director for the Endangered Species Program. Prior to that, he was the AssistantRegional Director for Ecological Services in the Southwest Region. As Assistant Regional Director, Arroyoled region-wide implementation of the Endangered Species Act, Environmental Contaminants, FederalActivities, Habitat Conservation, Partners for Fish and Wildlife, and the Coastal Program. He managed theprogramʼs appropriations (average $20 million) and had oversight of over 200 employees region-wide.Born in New York City and raised in his parentʼs native Puerto Rico, he attended the public school systemin Puerto Rico, graduating from Ponce High School in 1982. He attended Catholic University of PuertoRico and graduated in 1988 with a Bachelorʼs degree in science with a major in Biology. In 1991, heearned a Masterʼs degree in science with a major in Zoology from the University of Arkansas. Arroyo is anoutdoor enthusiast and particularly enjoys hiking, fishing, and nature photography.

GGeenneettiicc BBiiooccoonnttrrooll ooff IInnvvaassiivvee FFiisshh ((SSPPEEAAKKEERR BBIIOOSS))International Symposium on

Jim BarrettDirector, Native Fish Strategy, Murray-Darling Basin Authority, Canberra, AustraliaJim Barrett is the Director of the Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin, which is a 50-year plansupported by six governments to rehabilitate native fish populations, which are estimated to have declinedto 10% of their levels over the last 200 years. Prior to this position, he coordinated the NationalManagement Strategy for Carp Control, and also co-authored a national research plan for carp control anda guide to enable regional community groups to prioritise carp management activities in their own catchment.Barrett has also managed national programs on feral animals, wildlife management, and a comprehensivereserve system for Australia. He co-conducted a review into the Wildlife Protection (Regulation of Exportsand Imports) Act 1982, and participated in on-ground initiatives to band migratory birds, tag turtles, anderadicate rats on Australiaʼs small island territories. As Director of the Native Fish Strategy, he hasauthored numerous papers on carp and other invasive fish in the Murray-Darling Basin; the provision offishways (including a program nearing completion that will provide 2500 km of continuous fish passagealong the Murray river); and the design and implementation of large-scale rehabilitation reaches.

Paul J. BarrettDevils Hole Pupfish Recovery Coordinator, Nevada Fish and Wildlife Service,Las Vegas, NevadaAs Devils Hole Pupfish Recovery Coordinator, Dr. Paul Barrett represents the Nevada Fish and WildlifeService in coordinated recovery actions among several agencies and applies structured decision analysis tothis critically imperiled species. Dr. Barrett will begin his new position as Regional Science Advisor andClimate Change Coordinator in the Serviceʼs Albuquerque Regional Office in July 2010. Dr. Barrett receivedhis Bachelorʼs degree in Biology from Bates College, in Lewiston, Maine, a Masterʼs in Zoology fromArizona State University, and a Ph.D. at the University of Arizona where his research focused on habitat useby native fishes in the presence and absence of non-native species. Upon completion of his Ph.D. studies,he worked in several Fish and Wildlife Service offices throughout the western United States. He taughtclasses throughout the United States on endangered species recovery planning and structured decision-making for the Serviceʼs National Conservation Training Center. He also worked for Arizona EcologicalServices Office of the Fish and Wildlife Service in Phoenix, where he specialized in instream flow studies.

Keynote Speaker: Daniel Simberloff – University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TennesseeDinner, Tuesday, June 22, 7:00 p.m., Courtyard BallroomDaniel Simberloff is a Nancy Gore Hunger Professor of Environmental Studies at the University ofTennessee, Knoxville, where he directs the Institute for Biological Invasions. He is editor-in-chief ofBiological Invasions, associate editor of the Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, editorof the forthcoming Encyclopedia of Biological Invasions, and serves on the editorial boards of several otherjournals. He has served on the United States National Science Board 2000-2006 and in 2006 was namedEminent Ecologist by the Ecological Society of America. His research projects investigate insects, plants,fungi, birds, and mammals. His publications number ca. 500 and center on ecology, biogeography,evolution, and conservation biology; much of his research focuses on causes and consequences ofbiological invasions. He received his A.B. (1964) and Ph.D. (1968) from Harvard University and was afaculty member at Florida State University from 1968 through 1997, when he joined the Department ofEcology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Tennessee.

Tillmann BenfeyProfessor of Biology and Director of Animal Care, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, CanadaIn addition to his work at the University of New Brunswick, Dr. Tillmann Benfey is also currently Presidentof the Aquaculture Association of Canada (2010-11). His research focuses on basic and applied aspectsof sex control in fish. He has supervised the research of M.S. and Ph.D. students and has published over75 peer-reviewed scientific papers. He pioneered the use of triploidy for controlling sexual maturation offarmed salmonid fish and is currently continuing this research with cod. He was also the leader of theteam that developed the worldʼs only halibut broodstock capable of producing all-female offspring. He hasserved in an advisory capacity on the safety and environmental impacts of farmed and genetically modifiedfish for the Canadian and U.S. governments, as well as for the United Nations (Food and AgricultureOrganization and World Health Organization). He holds a B.S. from McGill University (Montreal), M.S.from Memorial University (Newfoundland), and a Ph.D. from the University of British Columbia.

Robert H. Devlin Director, Centre for Aquatic Biotechnology Regulatory Research, DFO, Fisheriesand Oceans Canada, Vancouver, British Colombia, CanadaDr. Robert Devlin's laboratory focuses on the assessment of transgenic and domesticated salmonids forecological risk assessments, physiological and genetic studies of fish sex determination, pathogendiagnostics, and evaluation of techniques for biological containment of aquacultured fish. Dr. Devlinreceived his Ph.D. in 1984 from the University of British Columbia and conducted post-doctoral research at Simon Fraser University and the University of Washington. He then joined Fisheries and OceansCanada at the West Vancouver Laboratory. He is also an adjunct professor of Zoology, University ofBritish Columbia. He has been awarded the Prix dʼExcellence Award (DFO) 2009, ADM Science (DFO)Award of Distinction 2008, Deputy Minister's Commendation (DFO) 1996, Merit Award, Fisheries andOceans Canada 1993, Medical Research Council Post-doctoral Fellowship 1988-1989, NSERC Post-doctoral Fellowship 1985-1987, and University Graduate Fellowship 1980-1983.

Wayne Fulton Program Leader, Freshwater Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Fisheries ResearchBranch, Department of Primary Industries, Alexandra, Victoria, AustraliaWayne Fulton's career spans 40 years in freshwater fisheries research and management including hands-on experience in carp eradicationin Tasmania in the mid-1970ʼs to his present role as Program Leader-Freshwater Products and Strategies in Australiaʼs Invasive AnimalsCooperative Research Centre. The Freshwater Program consists of a portfolio of projects primarily focusing on carp and tilapia controland management options. It includes international collaborations on the use of pheromone attractants and genetic technologies such asʻdaughterlessʼ for management of invasive fish species.

Nicholas J. BaxLeader, Marine Biodiversity Hub, University of Tasmania Understanding Oceans Ecosystems, CSIRO Wealth from Oceans Flagship, Hobart, Tasmania, AustraliaDr. Nicholas Bax applies his expertise in resource management to help understand, manage, and conserveaquatic biodiversity. With 30 years experience in developing options to improve aquatic resourcemanagement, he is experienced in the development, supervision, and presentation of research projects in Australia, the United States and Europe, and providing modelling expertise to support managementdecision-making. Dr. Bax and his teams of biologists, geologists, geneticists and oceanographers havepredicted and managed marine biodiversity, responded to oil spills, provided the scientific advice to managedeepwater fisheries, developed multidisciplinary assessments of marine ecosystems, and created optionsto control invasive marine species. He has developed computer models to determine impacts, andworked in private and public sectors on technology development, environmental impact assessment, andenvironmental mitigation and design. Dr. Bax earned Bachelors and Masters degrees in Natural Sciencesat Cambridge University, U.K. He completed his Ph.D. through the Fisheries Research Institute at the

University of Washington in 1983. He is currently a member of Global Oceans Biodiversity Initiative; a National Marine BiodiversityWorking Group member; a member of National Marine Protected Areas Working Group; and member of IUCN Invasive SpeciesSpecialist Group. He has published over 100 research papers, reports, and book chapters.

9

Kathryn GarforthLegal Officer, Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, Secretariat of the Convention onBiological Diversity, Montreal, Quebec, CanadaKathryn Garforth is the Legal Officer for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety with the Secretariat of theConvention on Biological Diversity. She works, in particular, on the handling, transport, packaging andidentification of living modified organisms and socio-economic considerations in biosafety decision-makingas well as liability, redress and compliance. Prior to joining the Secretariat, Garforth worked as aresearcher and consultant in the areas of access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing, biosafety andhealth. In this capacity, she led and participated in projects with Environment Canada, GTZ, theInternational Development Research Centre, the International Development Law Organization and theUnited Nations Environment Programme, amongst others. Garforth holds an LL.B. from Osgoode Hall Law School and a Master of Environmental Studies from the University of York in Toronto.

Fred GouldDepartment of Entomology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North CarolinaDr. Fred Gould investigates the ecology and genetics of insect pests in order to better understand naturaland human-induced evolution, contributing to improved food production, better health in humans and theenvironment. His research examines evolutionary approaches for dealing with agricultural problems.Since 1986, his theoretical and empirical research has been aimed at increasing the evolutionarysustainability of transgenic insecticidal crops. He conducted more basic research to determine theecological and genetic factors that shape herbivore host range and enable the evolution of complex traitssuch as sexual communication systems. Recently, Dr. Gould has begun using evolutionary theory indesigning strategies for effective use of transgenic insects for control of insect-vectored human diseases.A Queens College (NYC) graduate with a B.A. in Biology, he received a Ph.D. in Ecology andEvolutionary Biology from the State University of New York at Stony Brook. His thesis examined thegenetics of spider mite adaptation to novel host plants. After post-doctoral work, Dr. Gould was an insectecologist and geneticist at North Carolina State University.

Peter GreweResearch Scientist, CSIRO, Hobart, Tasmania, AustraliaPeter Grewe grew up on the Great Lakes and first worked on fishery management issues dealing withrecovery of lake trout populations in Lake Ontario. He now works on transgenic approaches to controllingsex determination in carp.

Jeff GundersonDirector, Minnesota Sea Grant, Duluth, MinnesotaPrior to being named Director of Minnesota Sea Grant in 2009, Gunderson served as Extension Educatorfor 31 years in fisheries, aquaculture, seafood safety, and invasive species, and as Associate Director,1997-2009. He is chair of the Great Lakes Sea Grant Program Leaders and Minnesota representative onthe North Central Regional Aquaculture Center Extension Technical Committee. A certified SeafoodHACCP trainer, he has helped apply the HACCP approach to reduce the risk of spreading invasivespecies. Gunderson earned B.S. and M.S degrees in Natural Resources from the University of WisconsinStevens Point. He received a Superior Program Award for (Assessing and Communicating Risk: APartnership to Evaluate a Superfund Site on the Leech Lake Tribal Lands in September, 2004), and aProgram Leaders Award for (A Program to Prevent Aquatic Invasive Species Spread by BaitfishProducers and Fish Farmers Using ANS HACCP, June, 2003)—both from the Great Lakes Sea GrantNetwork.

8

Cindy HagleyEnvironmental Quality Extension Educator, Minnesota Sea Grant, Duluth,MinnesotaCindy Hagley is an Extension Professor with the University of Minnesota Sea Grant program. Sheadministers outreach and educator training programs involving Great Lakes coastal environments,water & environmental quality, shoreland management, and coastal resources. Recently, she hasdeveloped, coordinated, and taught data-driven mapping workshops for the Great Lakes ObservingSystem and educator training workshops for the Center for Ocean Science Education ExcellenceGreat Lakes. She is an experienced group facilitator and is often called upon to facilitate planningactivities around natural resource issues. Hagley holds a B.S. degree in Biology from the University ofMinnesota, and a M.S. degree in Aquatic Ecology/Limnology from the University of California Davis.

Keith HayesSenior Research Scientist, CSIRO Division of Mathematical and InformationSciences, Hobart, Tasmania, AustraliaDr. Keith Hayes' major research interests lie in quantitative risk assessment methods, uncertainty analysistechniques, landscape-level assessments and indicators of environmental change. Dr. Hayes joined theCommonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) in 1997, and completed hisPh.D. in Quantitative Ecological Risk Assessment in 2000. Since joining CSIRO he has led over sixteenresearch projects addressing the ecological risks associated with biological (invasive species andtransgenic organisms) and physical (major coastal developments) stressors at local, regional andcontinental scales. He began his research career with the Institute of Offshore Engineering, Heriot-WattUniversity in 1993, at which he helped develop quantitative risk assessment techniques for theabandonment and disposal of offshore platforms, and for demersal trawl interactions with subsea wellhead and pipelines.

Michael HoffAquatic Invasive Species Program Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,Midwest Region, Fort Snelling, MinnesotaMichael Hoff serves as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serviceʼs representative on the Great Lakes Panel andMississippi River Basin Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species. He interacts with representatives from moststates throughout the U.S. Hoff began working on invasive species issues in 1975 and has spent most ofhis career conducting research on and managing invasive species.

Frances HomansProfessor, Applied Economics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MinnesotaDr. Frances Homans' recent research focuses on the economics of invasive species management,including a project to develop decision-making tools that could be used to allocate scarce forest pestmanagement resources. Dr. Homans has been actively involved in the National Science FoundationIntegrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship (IGERT) program Risk Analysis forIntroduced Species and Genotypes at the University of Minnesota and recently completed a bookchapter titled "Management of Invasive Aquatic Species in Minnesota," in collaboration with Dr.Raymond Newman. In addition to her work on invasive species, Dr. Homans' interests include theeconomics of land preservation in urban environments and regulated open access resource use. Shereceived her B.A. from Pomona College and her Masters and Ph.D. in Agricultural Economics from theUniversity of California Davis.

10 11

Anne R. KapuscinskiSherman Fairchild Distinguished Professor of Sustainability Science, DartmouthCollege, Hanover, New HampshireDr. Anne Kapuscinski is a fisheries scientist who has conducted research on fish conservation, ecologicalrisk assessment of genetically modified organisms, sustainable aquaculture, and participatory scenarioson sustainability challenges. Dr. Kapuscinski previously was Professor of Fisheries, Wildlife andConservation Biology and Sea Grant Extension Specialist in biotechnology and aquaculture at theUniversity of Minnesota, where she co-led a Ph.D. training program in ecological risk analysis ofintroduced species and genotypes funded by the National Science Foundation. She has providedscientific advice on biosafety of biotechnology to the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture under threeadministrations, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the World Health Organization, the Food andAgriculture Organization, and the State of Minnesota. Dr. Kapuscinski is lead editor of a CABI bookseries, Environmental Risk Assessment of Genetically Modified Organisms, as well as subject co-editorof Volume 3: Methodologies for Transgenic Fish (2007). Her role in National Academy of Sciencepublications includes chairing the workshop on Genetically Engineered Organisms, Wildlife and

Habitat (2008) and co-authoring Biological Confinement of Genetically Engineered Organisms (2004), Atlantic Salmon of Maine(2004) and Upstream: Salmon and Society in the Pacific Northwest (1996). She wrote, with Tim Patronski, a report for the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service on Genetic Methods for Biological Control of Non-native Fish in the Gila River Basin (2005). Her awardsinclude a Pew fellowship in marine conservation, an honor award from the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture for environmental protection,and the distinguished service award from the Society for Conservation Biology. She chairs the Science Advisory Committee ofthe World Fish Center and will chair Dartmouthʼs Environmental Studies Program starting July 2011.

Jennifer KuzmaAssociate Professor, Science, Technology & Environmental Policy, HumphreyInstitute of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MinnesotaDr. Jennifer Kuzma is Associate Professor in Science, Technology, and Environmental Policy at theHumphrey Institute, University of Minnesota. At the University of Minnesota, she teaches courses in riskanalysis and public policy, nanotechnology and societal implications, and science and technology policy.She was awarded Teacher of the Year in 2004. She previously served as study director at the U.S.National Academy of Sciences and as an AAAS Risk Policy Fellow at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.Her current research focuses on risk and oversight policy for bio- and nanotechnology, and she iscurrently working on four National Science Foundation grants in this area. She has served on theGovernorʼs Biosciences Advisory Committee; Social and Ethical Issues Advisory Board of the U.S.National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network; Executive Committee of the Society for the Study ofNanoscience and Emerging Technologies; the European Commission Advisory Group for the Science,Economy and Society Directorate; and the United Nations World Health Organization-Food andAgriculture Organization Joint Expert Meeting on the Applications of Nanotechnologies to the Food andAgriculture Sectors.

Brian LeungDepartment of Biology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada Dr. Brian Leung's research interests include ecological forecasting of invasive species (which species willarrive, where they will occur, and what effects will they have), and using decision theory and bioeconomicsto structure their management. He is Assistant Professor of Ecology, Environmental Science, InvasionBiology, and Mathematical Modeling at McGill University, and previously served as research assistantprofessor for the University of Notre Dame Biology Department. He holds a B.S. in Biology, University ofBritish Columbia, a Ph.D. in Biology, Carleton University in Ottawa, and Post-doctorate in Zoology,University of Cambridge (United Kingdom). His research is widely published and recent works include"Searching for Biological Invaders: Rapidly Delimiting the Invasion Boundary." Diversity and Distributions.March 2010.

Weiming Li Professor, Fisheries, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MichiganDr. Weiming Li is a professor of Fisheries at Michigan State University, with affiliations in Physiology andNeuroscience. His primary academic goal is to develop a better understanding of lamprey biology. Dr. Li'sresearch has enabled a large scale field experiment to develop effective and environmentally benignmethods to control sea lamprey. The sea lamprey is one of the few extant jawless vertebrate species.Through examination of the sea lamprey model, his results help infer the origin of vertebrate animals, witha focus on evolution of several physiological mechanisms and gene families. His current research foci arepheromone communication, genomics and behavioral endocrinology of sea lamprey. Weiming Li receivedhis Ph.D. in Fisheries from the University of Minnesota, and post-doctoral training in the Monell ChemicalSenses Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Paul C. Marsh Owner, Marsh & Associates, LLC, Tempe, ArizonaAs owner of an environmental consulting company in Tempe, Arizona, and Emeritus Faculty in theSchool of Life Sciences at Arizona State University, Dr. Paul Marsh has performed research,management, conservation, and educational activities for nearly 30 years. He is widely regardedamong the leading authorities on southwestern native fish. He holds degrees from the University ofConnecticut (B.A. in Life Sciences, 1971, and M.S. in Natural Resources Conservation, 1973) and theUniversity of Minnesota (Ph.D. in Fisheries, 1979). Dr. Marsh moved to Arizona in 1980 and has hada 28-year career at Arizona State University.

Kristen C. Nelson Environmental Sociologist, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MinnesotaDr. Kristin Nelson contributes to the interdisciplinary understanding of environmental change and itsdynamic relationship with human systems. Her recent publications add to our understanding of stakeholderengagement in environmental risk assessment for genetically modified organisms and nanotechnology. Dr. Nelson is an active member of the National Science Foundation-Integrative Graduate Education andResearch Traineeship program on Risk Analysis for Introduced Species and Genotypes at the Universityof Minnesota. Her other projects include household behaviors and biogeochemical cycling in urbanecosystems, social networks and multi-functional agricultural systems, and a range of social science projectson wildfire preparedness. She is an Associate Professor in the Department of Forest Resources and theDepartment of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology at the University of Minnesota. She receivedher M.S. and Ph.D. in Natural Resource Sciences from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Larry Riley Wildlife Management Division Coordinator, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, ArizonaDr. Larry Riley is employed by the Arizona Game and Fish Department, the agency statutorily charged with the responsibility for wildlifemanagement for the state. Serving for 27 years, Dr. Riley currently serves as a deputy to the Assistant Director for the WildlifeManagement of the Agency, coordinating among its five program branches (Game, Fisheries, Nongame, Habitat Evaluation andProtection, and Research) and with the other divisions in the department. Among his current duties, Dr. Riley represents his departmenton the Fisheries and Water Resources Policy Committee and Invasive Species Committee of the Association of Fish and WildlifeAgencies; and the Inland and Marine Fisheries Committee and Invasive Species Working Group for the Western Association of Fish andWildlife Agencies. In those roles, he served as the associationʼs ex-officio member of the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force from2002 through 2007. He has also served the Arizona Game and Fish Department as the Chief of Fisheries, Manager for the Funds andPlanning Unit of the Directorʼs Office, Environmental Compliance Supervisor, Aquatic Habitat Coordinator, Fisheries Planner, andFisheries Statistician. Prior to the Arizona Game and Fish Department, Larry was employed by the Research Foundation of Ohio StateUniversity and the Ohio Cooperative Fisheries Research Unit. Larry received a B.A. degree (with a concentration in biology) fromBellarmine College in Louisville, Kentucky; conducted graduate studies at the University of Louisville and Ohio State University. Hereceived a M.S. degree in Zoology and Fisheries from Ohio State University.

12 13

Larisa RudenkoSenior Advisor, BiotechnologyU.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Veterinary Medicine and Directorof Animal Biotechnology Interdisciplinary Group, Rockville, MarylandDr. Larisa Rudenko has worked with public and private sector stakeholders to develop science-basedpolicies for the regulation of animal biotechnology. She is recognized internationally for her expertise inrisk assessment and biotechnology, having served on the European Food Safety Authority working groupon animal cloning, the U.N. sponsored Codex Alimentarius Task Forces and Food and AgricultureOrganization/World Health Organization working groups and the Organization for Economic Cooperationand Development expert consultations. She serves on international and U.S. federal grant study sections,program review committees, and scientific advisory panels for government and the private sector. Beforejoining the Food and Drug Administration, Dr. Rudenko founded Integrative Biostrategies, a Washington,D.C. based consulting group. Prior to that, she worked as Managing Director of The Life SciencesConsultancy, which provided technical and regulatory consulting services and venture capital tobiotechnology start-up companies. She also worked at the ENVIRON corporation. Dr. Rudenko received

her A.B. degree from Bowdoin College (Biology, Music) and her Ph.D. in Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology from the StateUniversity of New York at Stony Brook; she is a Diplomat of the American Board of Toxicology.

Leah SharpePh.D. Candidate, Conservation Biology Program, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MinnesotaAs a Ph.D. candidate, Leah Sharpe is working with Anne Kapuscinski and coordinated this symposium.She received her B.A. from Williams College and an M.S. from the University of Minnesota, workingwith Dr. Peter Sorensen on cyprinidsʼ responses to bile acids. She is completing a dissertation focusedon environmental risk assessment and decision support regarding control and management of aquaticinvasive species. She is currently a National Science Foundation Trainee in an Integrative GraduateEducation and Research Traineeship program focusing on Risk Analysis for Introduced Species andGenotypes.

Stephanie Showalter Director, National Sea Grant Law Center, University of Mississippi, Oxford,MississippiStephanie Showalter is director of the Law Center (four years) and oversees a variety of legal education,research, and outreach activities, including providing legal research services to Sea Grant constituentson ocean and coastal law issues. She holds adjunct positions at the University of Mississippi School ofLaw, teaching such courses as Ocean and Coastal Law and Wetlands Law and Regulation. Her researchon natural resources, marine, and environmental law issues has been widely published, and recent works include "Will California Law Apply to Hubbs-SeaWorld Research Instituteʼs Offshore AquacultureDemonstration Project? An Analysis of the Extraterritorial Application of State Aquaculture Laws"published in the West-Northwest Journal of Environmental Law and Policy. Showalter supervises lawstudent research and writing and provides assistance to organizations and government agencies withinterpretation of statutes, regulations, and case law. She received a B.A. in History from PennsylvaniaState University, a joint J.D./Masters of Studies in Environmental Law from Vermont Law School, and islicensed to practice law in Pennsylvania and Mississippi.

Luke Skinner Supervisor, Invasive Species Program, Minnesota Department of NaturalResources, Minneapolis, MinnesotaDr. Luke Skinner currently oversees research to develop biological controls for several invasive plantspecies. For nearly two decades, he has worked on the prevention and management of aquatic andterrestrial invasive species including zebra mussels, Asian carp, buckthorn, purple loosestrife,Eurasian watermilfoil, garlic mustard and other species. A key role Dr. Skinner plays is forming policyand regulation around invasive species issues in Minnesota. He received his Ph.D. in Entomology,specializing in biological control of invasive plants. He is also an Adjunct Professor, University ofMinnesota.

Peter W. Sorensen Professor, Fisheries, Wildlife & Conservation, University of Minnesota,St. Paul, MinnesotaBest-known for his expertise in fish pheromones (potent species-specific signals that pass betweenorganisms of the same species), Dr. Peter Sorensen focuses on sea lamprey and more recently on thebiology of invasive common carp with the certitude that a comprehensive understanding will lead to ameans of controlling them. His groupʼs recent discovery that young common carp only survive in shallowlakes that experience extreme environmental fluctuations (Bajer & Sorensen 2010 Biological Invasions) isnow being applied to several local lakes where carp are being controlled without the use of poisons.Dr. Sorensen has published over 80 peer-reviewed articles on fish pheromones, nearly half on invasivespecies. Another 30 papers deal with other topics. He was awarded a patent for identifying and developinga pheromone for sea lamprey in the Great Lakes and this technology is now in experimental use. Heserves on the Mississippi River Basin Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species, the editorial board of theJournal of Chemical Ecology, and many university and national review committees. He currently hasseveral postdoctoral associates in his group, two graduate students and a variety of undergraduates,

many from foreign countries. He holds a Ph.D. in Biological Oceanography from the University of Rhode Island, and receivedpost-doctoral training from the University of Alberta.

Brian Stenquist Founder/Director, Meeting Challenges, St. Paul, MinnesotaBrian Stenquist is founder and director of Meeting Challenges, a consulting firm focusing on strategicplanning and meeting facilitation, with a particular emphasis on natural resources management,stakeholder engagement, and organizational transformation.

John TeemResearch Scientist, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,Division of Aquaculture, Tallahassee, FloridaDr. John Teem left biomedical research to join FDACS as an invasive species biologist. Seeingopportunities to apply molecular biology and genetics to eradicate invasive species, he beganinvestigating genetic methods for causing the directed extinction of exotic fish populations. His workled to a novel method of eradicating fish by the use of a Trojan Y chromosome strategy. He is currentlyinvestigating a sterile-release approach for Golden Apple Snail control, and DNA-based methods todetect the rat lungworm, a human disease-causing parasite associated with invasive apple snails.Prior to that, he was assistant professor at Florida State University where he developed a yeastmodel system to identify drug candidates for the human genetic disease cystic fibrosis. Dr. Teemearned his Ph.D. in Biology at Brandeis University working with Dr. Michael Rosbash. His thesiswork was instrumental in defining yeast as a model system for the study of RNA splicing. After com-pleting his Ph.D., he accepted a post-doctoral position to study yeast genetics at the MassachusettsInstitute of Technology in Boston.

Ron ThresherSenior Research Scientist, CSIRO Division of Marine and AtmosphericResearch, Hobart, Tasmania, AustraliaDr. Ron Thresher works on a range of topics—from larval ecology and analysis of skeletal chemistry asmarkers for age, growth and population structure in fish and corals to impacts of invasive marineinvertebrates. As foundation head of the CSIRO Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests in1993, he became the scientific representative on Australia's national bodies for the development ofpolicy and management options for dealing with these pests. Those efforts led to CSIRO's "sterile ferals"initiative in 1997, which expanded into the current "daughterless" project, aimed at developing practicalgenetic options for the long-term control, and possibly eradication, of carp and other invasive fish. Hisbackground is in the behavior and ecology of fish, including a Ph.D. from the University of Miami onterritorial behavior in reef fish, and post-doctoral work at Scripps Institution of Oceanography and theUniversity of Sydney. He joined the Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial ResearchOrganisation Division of Marine Research in 1983. Dr. Thresher is the author of two books on reef fishbehavior, and lead or co-author on three patents and nearly 100 published papers.

15

GGeenneettiicc BBiiooccoonnttrrooll ooff IInnvvaassiivvee FFiisshh ((AABBSSTTRRAACCTTSS))International Symposium on

Session: History of the Issue Monday: 8:15 A.M.Title: The History of Genetic Biocontrol Agents in the Gila River Basin, New Mexico-ArizonaSpeaker: Paul J. Barrett, Ph.D., Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office, Las Vegas, NevadaDescription: The Gila River basin encompasses portions of western New Mexico and much of central Arizona. All native fish,including four that are threatened or endangered pursuant to the Endangered Species Act are vulnerable to the threat of invasiveaquatic species already established in the basin. A 2001 biological opinion resulted in several million dollars to be used for theenhancement of native fishes in the basin, and removal of non-native aquatic species. Historically, fisheries managers have usedeither electrofishing or toxicants to remove invasive fish. The effectiveness of each has been limited. Over the past decade,researchers have begun to consider the development of genetic biocontrol agents. These genetic solutions may provide additionaltools to remove established populations of non-native fish, but they have inherent risks including technological, sociological,economical, and philosophical challenges.

Session: Chromosome-based: Sterilization Monday: 8:45 A.M.Title: Use of Triploidy for Biocontrol of Invasive SpeciesSpeaker: Tillmann J. Benfey, Department of Biology, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New BrunswickDescription: Triploids have three sets of chromosomes in their genomes rather than the normal (diploid) two sets. Although there area few examples of naturally occurring all-female triploid hybrid populations that reproduce parthenogenetically, triploid individuals ofdioecious diploid species are sterile. Somatic cell division is not affected by triploidy but the vast majority of gonial cells do notcomplete meiosis and those that do are aneuploid. Triploidy has been induced in many species of fish using simple temperature orpressure shocks applied to eggs shortly after fertilization. In most species, there is a pronounced effect of sex on gonadaldevelopment and sexual maturation of triploids due to differences in numbers and growth dynamics of germ cells. Since femalestypically produce relatively small numbers of large yolky eggs, triploid females tend to have very small ovaries containing mostlyoogonia and pre-vitellogenic oocytes, and they retain the physiological and behavioural characteristics of juveniles. Males, on theother hand, typically produce relatively large numbers of small spermatozoa, and triploid males tend to develop large testes in spiteof most of their germ cells not completing meiosis. Importantly, triploid testes are competent in terms of steroid biosynthesis, with theresult that triploid males are indistinguishable from diploids in their reproductive physiology and behaviour. However, because theyproduce aneuploid spermatozoa, their offspring do not survive past larval stages. From an aquaculture perspective, triploidy istypically combined with endocrine manipulations to produce all-female triploid populations. From a biocontrol perspective, theopposite approach (all-male triploid populations) could theoretically be used for “sterile male” population control. This presentationwill provide an overview of triploidy induction methodology and provide data from recent research with triploid Atlantic cod to showhow the sterile male approach might be used for biocontrol of invasive fish species.

Session: Chromosome-based: Trojan Chromosome Monday: 9:15 A.M.Title: Development of a Trojan Y Chromosome Strategy for the Eradication of Invasive FishSpeaker: John Teem, Ph.D., Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Aquaculture, Tallahassee, FloridaDescription: The Trojan Y Chromosome strategy makes use of a Trojan fish with two Y chromosomes to alter the sex ratio of a fishpopulation over time and cause local extinction as a result of the elimination of females. The strategy requires that (1) the target fishhas an XY sex-determination system, (2) a viable YY female fish can be produced that mates with an efficiency comparable to wildtypeand (3) that the YY female fish can be produced in large quantities in an aquaculture context. These criteria are met by Nile tilapia(Oreochromis niloticus), which is presently the best candidate fish for testing the strategy experimentally. For other invasive fish such asthe Asian carp, the mechanism of sex-determination has not been as well established. Experimental evidence suggests that thebighead carp (Hypophthalmichthys nobilis) and silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix) have an XY sex-determination system, but ithas not yet been established whether a YY female fish of either species is viable and mates normally. Identification of Y-specific DNAmarkers would greatly facilitate the construction and testing of YY Asian carp. Additionally, methods must yet be developed for highefficiency sex-reversal of Asian carp using hormone-containing feed.

Session: Gene-based: Deleterious Gene Spread Monday: 10:25 A.M.Title: GM Technologies for the Control of Invasive Fishes: Theory and Practice of Constructs to Reduce the Fertility and Viability of Pest PopulationsSpeaker: Ron Thresher and Peter Grewe, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Sciences and the Australian Invasive Animal CooperativeResearch Centre, Hobart, TasmaniaDescription: Over the last decade, Australian scientists have been examining a number of different options for reducing pestpopulations through use of (potentially) species-specific genetic technology. These technologies divide into three broadly differentareas: (1) a virally-vectored, genetically modified agent that sterilizes the pest; (2) genetic modifications that are stocked via carriersinto the target population, reducing its fertility or increasing mortality; and (3) genetic constructs that render stocked individuals sterilewhile retaining their reproductive competitiveness. We have also explored, in concept and to a limited extent experimentally in amarine plant, the development of genetically based species-specific biocides. This talk will outline the theoretical underpinnings of thedifferent approaches, the situations for which each was developed and in which each might be effective, and their logistical, socialand technological constraints. We will also summarize the state-of-development of each technology, which ranges from, production-ready and demonstrated as viable in fish to conceptually feasible, but largely unexplored experimentally.

14

17

Session: Gene-based: Techniques from Insect Pest Control Monday: 11:15 A.M.Title: Transgenic Fish Meeting 2010Speaker: Fred Gould, Department of Entomology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North CarolinaDescription: This presentation provides a summary of the theoretical, experimental, and practical issues being addressed by researchersattempting to genetically suppress or alter insect pest populations. The two genetic insect control systems that are furthest along in developmenttarget the fruitfly, Ceratitis capitata, and the mosquito, Aedes aegypti. In the case of C. capitata, the transgene construct causes conditionalmortality of male and female embryos which is important for this pest in which larvae cause the economic damage. For Aedes aegypti, themost advanced system involves a transgene that results in conditional female adult mortality. In this case it is the adult females that vectorhuman disease so death of males is not needed, and this enables the female-killing genes to be passed on to subsequent generations.Work on homing endonucleases and Medea elements is also progressing. These techniques have the advantage of requiring release of amuch smaller number of transgenic insects. Simple population genetic models have been developed and are very useful, but the need formore complex models that include details of a pests population dynamics and population genetics will also be demonstrated.

Session: Other Gene Target Methods Monday: 11:45 A.M.Title: Application of Genomics Information in Development of Control Strategies for Sea LampreySpeaker: Weiming Li, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan

Description: The sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus), a successful and destructive invader of the Laurentian Great Lakes of NorthAmerica, is a primary cause of mortality in large and medium fish. The campaign to control and eradicate the sea lamprey from theGreat Lakes has lasted more than 50 years. Within this time period, the Great Lakes Fishery Commission (GLFC) has developed andmanaged an effective sea lamprey control program, relying mainly on such strategies as lampricide application and sterile malerelease. The sea lamprey is now a model species on which new control strategies are tested. Developing and using genomic informationfor additional control strategies for the sea lamprey is underway. The sea lamprey genome is the blueprint that has allowed this jawlessvertebrate to thrive in the Atlantic Ocean for more than 500 million years, and, more recently, to become the most successful predatorin the Great Lakes. Fortunately, this genome has been sequenced and the information is a major impetus to advance sea lampreybiology and management research. A hypothesis- and genomics-driven approach to characterize relevant families of genes, such asP450 enzyme and chemoreceptor genes, have been adopted. The combined tools from several disciplines—bioinformatics, nextgeneration sequencing techniques, cellular and molecular biology and biochemistry—help characterize the structure and function ofthese genes and develop strategies that target the products of these genes. The theoretical framework and research strategiespresented here are likely to have impacts in development of techniques for control of various aquatic invasive species.

Authors: Weiming Li, Leslie Kuhn, and John Teeter

Session: Integrated Pest Management of Invasive Fish and Mussels Monday: 2:00 P.M.Title: A Successful Integrated Pest Management Scheme for the Common CarpSpeaker: Peter Sorensen, Professor of Fisheries, Wildlife & Conservation, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota

Description: The common carp (Cyprinus carpio) is one the most abundant and damaging invasive fish in North America and Australiawhere it has severely damaged both water quality and many shallow-water food webs. Control presently focuses on nonspecific poisonsand water draw-downs with little sustainable success. However, we recently discovered that carp population abundance in the Midwesthas very little density dependence because recruitment is driven by seasonal environmental fluctuations which control native fishpredation pressure on carp young (Bajer & Sorensen 2010). This insight has permitted us to institute an experimental integrated pestmanagement scheme (IPM) in Minnesota lakes which focuses on targeted adult removal using Judas fish and pheromones whilesuppressing recruitment by balancing native fish populations. A statistical model describes and guides the process and it has beenable to suppress carp populations to about 10% of their initial levels in three local lakes for several years. During this time, significantimprovements in water quality have been noted. The ramifications for other species and genetic control will be discussed.

Authors: Peter Sorensen, Przemek Bajer, Hangkyo Lim, Haude Levesque, Chris Chizinski, Justin Silbernagel and Jake Osborne

Session: Integrated Pest Management of Invasive Fish and Mussels Monday: 2:00 P.M.Title: Integrated Pest Management of Invasive AnimalsSpeaker: Ron E. Thresher, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Hobart, Tasmania

Description: Invasive species are a major threat to biodiversity, costing the world economy billions of dollars annually and provingdifficult if not impossible to control using current approaches. Recombinant technologies could revolutionize management of suchpests, but are subject to a range of genetic, behavioral and ecological factors that could limit their efficacy or applicability. We use arealistically parameterized combined population dynamics/genetics model to assess the potential of, and constraints on, a suite ofrecombinant approaches that have been suggested for pest control. Three questions are addressed: (1) How robust are the proposedmethods in driving a pest population to quasi-extinction over a wide range of conditions? (2) How effective are the proposed methodsunder a set of relatively optimistic parameters? and (3) What are the benefits of different management options that could be used in arecombinant-based integrated pest control program, e.g., selective harvests of males or females, investment in high copy numberindividuals, and are there optimal integrated strategies? All methods are sensitive to the degree of density dependence in the pestpopulation and to operational issues such as maximum copy number and stocking levels, which affect introgression rates. Optimalinvestment strategies for an Integrated Pest Management program (that includes the non-linear interactions of recombinant strategiesand complementary management options) can be assessed through the sensitivity analyses. The subtle effects of even minor variabilityin some parameters, such as extra mortality due to the presence of the construct, further suggest that genetic techniques be applied in an active adaptive management framework.

Authors: Nicholas J. Bax and Ron E. Thresher

16

Session: Public Perspectives on GMO Development Monday: 2:40 P.M.Title: Public Perspectives on GMO DevelopmentSpeaker: Leah Sharpe, Ph.D. Candidate, Conservation Biology Program, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MinnesotaDescription: Bringing a new technology like genetic biocontrol of invasive species into practical application will require a goodunderstanding of affected populations' knowledge base, values, attitudes, and concerns. Focus groups are a valuable technique forexploring peopleʼs feelings and opinions, especially to better understand how they view issues about which little is known. Eightfocus groups were conducted around the Great Lakes and Lake Champlain in the United States to obtain the first in-depthdescriptions of how different stakeholders see the use of this technology. A variety of stakeholder groups were represented, rangingfrom natural resource managers to citizen advocacy groups to commercial groups. Conducting a focus group relatively early in theprocess of developing genetic biocontrol methods allows us to understand how the participants currently view the idea of geneticbiocontrol approaches; what they like and dislike about them; what would stop them from supporting this technology; and whatwould encourage their support. Results indicate stakeholders are excited about potential technological innovations, but concernedabout unintended consequences, especially impacts to native species. Although their initial reactions to the technology tended tobe negative and fear-based, stakeholders were inclined to support further research provided that certain guidelines and standards(e.g., following the precautionary principle, risk assessments conducted by independent groups, making decisions in a transparentfashion) were followed.

Session: Colorado River Basin Tuesday: 8:30 A.M.Title: The Colorado River Basin, its Native and Non-native Fish, and the Potential for Application of Genetic Biocontrol to theConservation of an Imperiled Fauna Speaker: Paul C. Marsh, Marsh & Associates, LLC, Tempe, ArizonaDescription: Little more than a century ago the Colorado River and its tributary streams and associated aquatic habitats wereoccupied by a unique ichthyofauna of about 53 freshwater taxa among six families. The delta and lowermost reaches were home tothree marine or brackish water kinds. Aquatic systems underwent dramatic physical alteration associated with the development ofwater for agricultural, domestic, industrial, and other human uses. Novel species were brought to the region–trout and warmwatersport fish and their forage to support recreational fisheries, but also African and Central American cichlids, Asian minnows, andcoastal marine species. To date, nearly 100 non-native taxa among 24 families are recorded from the basin. Non-native fish areimplicated in the decline, extirpation, or extinction of the indigenous fauna, of which more than two-thirds are now formally recognizedas threatened, endangered, or otherwise imperiled. As a result, management strategies to benefit the natives increasingly involveapplication of techniques that disadvantage the non-natives, and a paradigm of “barrier and renovate” has been adopted, especiallyfor smaller systems. In some larger waters, simple mechanical removal of non-native fish is being implemented, with variable outcomesand secondary effects. These approaches have limited success in eliminating undesirable species, and often-times only temporaryrelief from offending targets. It would seem this is where genetic biocontrol could provide a useful tool if it can be applied to reduce,eliminate, or otherwise control targeted non-native species. The need for genetic biocontrol to assist with conservation and recovery ofnative fish is strong, and the challenge for researchers is to develop a workable technology so that native fish of the Colorado Riverbasin can be conserved for future generations.

Session: Laurentian Great Lakes Tuesday: 8:50 A.M.Title: Laurentian Great Lakes and Their Invasive SpeciesSpeaker: Jeff Gunderson, Minnesota Sea Grant, Duluth, MinnesotaDescription: The five Laurentian Great Lakes contain 21% of the world's fresh water. The lakes are connected to the Atlantic Ocean viathe St. Lawrence River, and several other diversions connect the Great Lakes to the James Bay/Hudson Bay drainage, the MississippiRiver drainage, and the Hudson River drainage. The Great Lakes bays, tributaries, and channels contain a wide variety of habitat typesfrom warm eutrophic waters to cold oligotrophic lakes to a variety of lotic environments. The variety of habitats has provided opportunitiesfor approximately 182 non-native species to find suitable habitat and become established. The 182 non-native species represent 55 rootedplants, 27 species of algae, 49 invertebrates (including 18 mollusks and 20 crustaceans), 23 pathogens, and 28 species of fish. Eleven of the 28 fish species were intentionally introduced. Other pathways for introduction of non-native species include ballast water fromtransoceanic ships, aquarium/nursery releases, bait releases, canals, dispersal from initial introduction areas, and aquaculture releases.Non-native species have had significant negative impacts in the Great Lakes, pushing native species to extirpation, completely alteringaquatic community structure, costing billions of dollars in lost revenue and increasing costs of control and management. Some non-nativespecies like Pacific salmon and brown trout also create recreational fishing opportunities that annually generate millions of dollars inrevenue. The species having the greatest negative impact in the Great Lakes include the sea lamprey, rainbow smelt, alewives, roundgobies, common carp, and white perch. Other non-natives negatively impacting the Great Lakes include zebra/quagga mussels, ViralHemorrhagic Septicemia Virus (direct and indirect impacts) spiny and fishhook waterfleas, and purple loosestrife. Non-native speciescurrently knocking at the door of the Great Lakes, like the silver and bighead carp, may prove to be problematic in the future.

Session: Mississippi River Basin Tuesday: 9:10 A.M.Title: Most Widespread and Invasive Fish and Mollusks in the Mississippi River BasinSpeaker: Michael Hoff, Aquatic Invasive Species Program Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort Snelling, MinnesotaDescription: The Mississippi River Basin (Basin) constitutes forty-two percent of the continental United States, and includes all or portions of 31 states. Thirty-seven non-native fish have been collected in the Basin, and at least 12 of them are established. Fivenon-native mollusks are established in the Basin. In 2003, a survey of Mississippi River Basin state points-of-contact showed that the most widespread and troublesome (i.e., invasive) fish were common carp (15 states), bighead carp (14 states), silver carp(11 states), and grass carp (7 states). The zebra mussel (20 states) and Asian clam (7 states) were the most widespread andtroublesome mollusks. Collectively, these fish and mollusks are candidates for integrated pest management programs that couldinclude genetic biocontrol approaches.

18 19

Session: Murray-Darling Basin Tuesday: 9:30 A.M.Title: Invasives in the Murray-Darling BasinSpeaker: Jim Barrett, Native Fish Strategy, Murray-Darling Basin Authority, Canberra, AustraliaDescription: The Native Fish Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin lists invasive species as one of eight major threats to the decimatednative fish populations of the Murray-Darling Basin. The Basin contains 36 native species, and 11 invasives. The range and impacts ofthe invasive fish vary. Some are present in pest proportions and further introductions are inevitable over time. Tilapia (not yet in theBasin), carp and Eastern gambusia have the greatest potential to affect native fish and their habitats, while Oriental weatherloach couldbecome a highly invasive pest. The impacts of trout species are generally restricted to the cooler upland sections in the south andsoutheast of the Basin. Redfin perch occur in the non-alpine areas in the southern Basin, although there are populations in some northern(warmer) rivers. To achieve its 50-year goal of restoring native fish populations to at least 60% of former pre-European levels, the strategyrecognizes that all threats must be addressed in a sustained and integrated manner. In addressing the invasive fish problem, the strategyʼsimmediate tasks are to limit the further spread of alien species; prevent the establishment of more alien species; incorporate alienspecies management into the broader framework of river rehabilitation; employ demonstration reaches as models; apply an integratedpackage of control techniques to problem sites and monitor the results, with the focus on reducing the damage caused by alien speciesrather than on their density; support the development of new control technologies; undertake risk assessments for alien fish speciescurrently in captivity; and educate and engage the community in alien fish problems and their management.

Session: Risk Assessment Methodology – Major Steps Tuesday 2: 10:30 A.M.Title: Major Steps and Hurdles to Scientific Risk AssessmentSpeaker: Keith Hayes, CSIRO, Division of Mathematical and Information Sciences, Hobart, TasmaniaDescription: This presentation will define what we understand by the term "scientific," identify the criteria we use to judge the sciencequality of an assessment, and examine how these criteria can be met when completing the major steps of a risk assessment. Broadlyspeaking, there are five major steps to a risk assessment: (1) set the context and scope; (2) identify hazards; (3) assess risks;(4) assess uncertainties; and, (5) monitor and review predictions. Each of these steps presents particular challenges. This presentationwill examine these challenges, methods for meeting these challenges, and the extent to which these methods meet the "science qualitycriteria" identified previously.

Session: Early Steps in Environmental Risk Assessment Tuesday: 1:00 P.M.Title: Early Steps in Environmental Risk Assessment for Genetic BiocontrolSpeaker: Anne R. Kapuscinski, Environmental Studies Program, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire

Description: The early steps in an environmental risk assessment (ERA) are crucially important because they frame the assessmentʼsscope and contents, influencing whose interests, which questions, and what sources and bodies of knowledge are included andexcluded from the later steps that lead to risk conclusions. Recent advances in ERA methodologies indicate transparent and sustainedinteraction between scientists and stakeholders, particularly during early steps, improves an assessmentʼs scientific validity and howwell it is trusted by interested parties. This presentation will introduce the following early steps of an ERA: (1) develop conceptual modelsof the socio-ecological system(s) into which a party proposes to release a specific genetic biocontrol technology; (2) develop andincorporate a human practices matrix; (3) identify the range of possible hazards; (4) prioritize hazards; (5) define risk assessmentendpoints; and (6) define risk acceptance criteria. The challenges inherent in conducting these steps are best handled by well-facilitatedparticipation of scientists and stakeholders in making complementary contributions as well as thoughtful abstraction and aggregation toreduce the complexity of the real world to a manageable level without losing sight of the critical interactions. It is also important toexercise great care in identifying assessment endpoints that are relevant to stakeholder concerns, feasible to measure, and goodscientific indicators of whether a specific environmental harm will occur. Methods for these early steps are qualitative, although theycan draw upon relevant quantitative information. The current early stage of development of genetic biocontrol of invasive fish providesa rare opportunity to initiate these early ERA steps at the upstream end of technology development when insights can inform its furtherdevelopment and guide research on prioritized risk assessment questions.

Session: Research Methods for Assessment Endpoints Tuesday: 1:30 P.M.Title: Phenotypic Variability in Transgenic Fish: Genetic and Environmental EffectsSpeaker: Robert H. Devlin, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Vancouver, British ColumbiaDescription: Assessing transgenic fish in laboratories prior to their entering nature is a necessary step in evaluating the efficacy ofthe transformation for its intended purpose. It is also necessary for assessing potential adverse or unanticipated effects on ecosystems.Gene constructs can be designed to alter a range of phenotypes in fish, particularly where the physiology of the processes involvedare well known, for example for growth enhancement. While growth hormone (GH) transgenesis now has been achieved in many fishspecies, the range of responses observed among species and strains is considerable, even when the same gene constructs areutilized. Further, pleiotropic phenotypic changes have been observed arising from effects on non-target pathways. Thus, uncertaintyremains in developing transgenic strains with phenotypes suitable for their original purpose. Once a strain has been selected, it isimportant to determine the extent to which phenotype varies across the different genetic backgrounds it will encounter in naturalpopulations. It is also important to assess the degree of phenotypic plasticity arising from different environmental conditions, becauseexternal variables have the capacity to modify a strain from phenotypes seen in its original laboratory assessment and thus createuncertainty for risk assessments. When traditional biocontainment methods for fish (such as triploidy, or monosexing of non-indigenousspecies) have been tested at population scales found in nature or in commercial aquaculture, stochastic variation in genetic anddevelopmental processes have been identified which cause rare exceptions (i.e. fertile diploids within triploid populations). Thus,coupling multiple strategies for inducing control of reproduction and/or viability may be required to achieve full containment. Withinthe context of alleviating harms from non-indigenous species, risks arising from incomplete containment or other scientific uncertaintiesshould be balanced against the potential benefits to be achieved.

Session: Problem Formulation and Options Assessment Tuesday: 2:00 P.M.Title: Problem Formulation and Options Assessment: An Approach for DeliberationSpeaker: Kristen Nelson, Environmental Sociologist, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MinnesotaDescription: Societal evaluation of new technologies and biological control approaches challenge current practices of governanceand science. Employing environmental risk assessment within governance and management planning assumes we have areasonable ability to understand consequences and predict adverse effects. However, traditional ERA has come under considerablecriticism for its many shortcomings, and current governance institutions have demonstrated limitations in transparency, publicinvolvement, assessing diverse values, and capacity. Problem Formulation and Options Assessment (PFOA) is a methodologyfounded on three key concepts in risk assessment (science-based consideration, deliberation, and multi-criteria analysis).Developed through a series of international workshops, and considered in relation to genetically modified organisms andnanotechnologies, the PFOA process emphasizes engagement with stakeholders in iterative stages, from identification of theproblem(s) through comparison of multiple solution options that could be used in the future with their associated benefits, harms,and risks. It provides “upstream public engagement” that can be revised at critical decision points along the way, from the initialproposal to monitoring post-implementation, providing societal deliberation informed by science and centered on values forimproved decision making.

Session: National Level – U.S.A. Wednesday: 8:35 A.M.Title: Overview of the Regulatory Framework Governing Genetic BiocontrolSpeaker: Stephanie Showalter, National Sea Grant Law Center, University of Mississippi School of Law, Oxford, MississippiDescription: This presentation will provide an overview of the U.S. regulatory framework governing genetic biocontrolefforts, including the Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology, the Food and Drug Administrationʼs NewAnimal Drug Application (NADA) process, and laws regulating the release of genetically modified organisms. Otherrelated domestic legal issues, such as compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and the EndangeredSpecies Act, will also be discussed. In addition, the impact of relevant international laws, including the Convention onBiological Diversity, will be considered. To examine how the federal agencies might approach a genetic biocontrol proposal,three case studies will be examined: Triploid grass carp, transgenic salmon, and GloFish.

Session: National Level – U.S.A. Wednesday: 8:35 A.M.Title: National Level - U.S.A.Speaker: Bryan Arroyo, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Assistant Director–Fisheries and Habitat Conservation, Washington, DCDescription: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), through its Fish Technology Centers and other programmatic elements,has the potential to play pivotal national and international roles in the development, testing, and evaluation of genetic biocontroltechnologies as environmentally appropriate components of integrated pest management programs. With affirmative responsibilitiesoutlined in Federal laws and statutes, such as the non-indigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990, the FWSʼFish Technology Centers already serve an important role in biocontrol of invasives through the Triploid Grass Carp Certification andInspection Program (TGCCIP) and through development of innovative genetic monitoring techniques for quagga and zebra mussels(Environmental DNA monitoring). Conservation offices serve leadership roles in developing biocontrol components of integratedpest management programs, such as the sterile male release technique for sea lamprey control. The FWS has other affirmativeresponsibilities that require careful examination and assessment of genetic biocontrols and their potential impacts on wildliferesources, including: (1) assessing the impacts of our actions on the environment; (2) consulting with other Federal action agencieson actions that may jeopardize listed species or adversely modify or destroy critical habitat; and (3) assuring that our actions do notintroduce or further spread invasive species. Biocontrol development must include a full evaluation and risk assessment of organismsreleased into the environment.

Session: National Level – U.S.A. Wednesday: 8:35 A.M.Title: FDAʼs Regulation of Genetically Engineered Animals: Environmental ConcernsSpeaker: Larisa Rudenko, Animal Biotechnology Interdisciplinary Group, U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for VeterinaryMedicine, Rockville, Maryland

Description: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates genetically engineered animals under the new animal drugprovisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) asdescribed in Guidance for Industry 187: Regulation of Genetically Engineered Animals Containing Heritable Recombinant DNAConstructs. The recombinant DNA construct introduced to produce a genetically engineered animal meets the definition of a drugbecause it is intended to alter the structure or function of the animal, though it is sometimes referred to as regulating the geneticallyengineered animal. NEPA requires that the sponsor of an investigational new animal drug file or new animal drug application mustsubmit environmental assessments under both components (i.e., during research and development, as well as under anticipatedpost-approval conditions). FDA has developed a hierarchical, risk-based, weight of evidence approach for evaluating applicationsfor approvals for genetically engineered animals. Each submission is considered on a case-by-case basis, and the risk questionsasked for each step of the process are tailored to the particular genetically engineered animal being considered. Conceptually,however, there are some general risk questions that should be addressed for all genetically engineered animals. For a specificgenetically engineered animal (or population) containing a specific rDNA construct, some environmental risk questions include thefollowing: What are the risks(s) under the proposed conditions of use for the application being considered? If not intended for freerelease, what is the likelihood of escape, and what kinds of containment processes are being considered? What are the potentialadverse outcomes associated with either escape or free release of the genetically engineered animal? A conceptual model forenvironmental risk assessment for genetically engineered animals will be presented, describing key parameters including theselection of appropriate comparators.

Authors: Larisa Rudenko and Eric M. Silberhorn

Authors: Anne R. Kapuscinski and Leah Sharpe

20 21

Session: National Level – Australia Wednesday: 9:30 A.M.Title: The Australian Gene Technology Regulatory FrameworkSpeaker: Wayne Fulton, Freshwater Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Alexandra, VictoriaDescription: The Gene Technology Act 2000 and the Gene Technology Regulations 2001 provide for a nationally consistentscheme for the regulation of certain dealings–where basically any work with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is defined as aʻdealingʼ–with GMOs by the Commonwealth and the States of Australia. The object of the Act is the protection of public and environmentalhealth from risks posed by GMOs by identification and management of the risks through regulation of the use of GMOs. TheCommonwealth legislation provides for the operation of corresponding legislation within the States. The Office of the Gene TechnologyRegulator is established within the Australian Government Department of Health and Aging to administer the legislation. The Act setsout the powers and functions of the Regulator and specifies the independence of this position. There are processes within the Act toestablish policy principles, policy guidelines and codes of practice to guide decisions of the Regulator. The Act prohibits any dealingand then specifies exceptions. The various classes of dealings are detailed in the Regulations. The Act establishes a licensing systemand procedures, including a risk analysis and management process. There are also processes for certification and accreditation offacilities and for accreditation of organizations for dealings with GMOs. The Act specifies the powers available for enforcement andmonitoring. It also specifies the formation and structure of advisory committees and creates centralized databases of GMOs andgenetically modified products approved in Australia.

Session: International Level – Cross Border Concerns Wednesday: 9:55 A.M. Title: The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and Transboundary Movements of Living Modified OrganismsSpeaker: Kathryn Garforth, Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, Montreal, QuebecDescription: The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety is an international treaty that promotes biosafety and the conservation andsustainable use of biological diversity by establishing practical rules and procedures for the safe transfer, handling and use of livingmodified organisms (LMOs), with a specific focus on regulating transboundary movements of these organisms, “from” one country toanother. Risk assessments carried out in accordance with the Protocol provide a basis for countries to decide whether or not toaccept imports of LMOs. These risk assessments aim to identify and evaluate the potential adverse effects that an LMO may haveon the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in the receiving environments, taking human health into account as well.They are to be undertaken in a scientifically sound and transparent manner and on a case-by-case basis using recognized riskassessment techniques. While the Protocol applies to all kinds of LMOs, an Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group (AHTEG) came out witha guidance document entitled “Guidance on Risk Assessment of Living Modified Organisms” (available at http://bch.cbd.int/protocol/Meetings/documents.shtml?eventid=3409). This guidance document contains a section on risk assessment of LM mosquitoes.Because the development of LM mosquitoes is often based on genetic biocontrol strategies aiming at reducing the populations ofmosquitoes that serve as vectors for human and animal diseases, this section of the guidance document may be of particularrelevance in the context of risk assessment of LM fish using genetic biocontrol strategies. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety isthe only international instrument that deals exclusively with LMOs. However, there are also a number of separate internationalinstruments and standard-setting processes that address various aspects of biosafety that are relevant to LM fish and biosafety,such as the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), Codex Alimentarius Commission and a number of World Trade Organization(WTO) agreements, such as the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures and the Technical Barriers toTrade Agreement.

Session: State Level – Minnesota Wednesday: 11:00 A.M.Title: Minnesotaʼs Invasive Species Program–Roles and Regulations in Managing Invasive SpeciesSpeaker: Luke Skinner, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Invasive Species Program, Minneapolis, MinnesotaDescription: For more than 20 years, Minnesota has worked to reduce the impacts of aquatic invasive species throughout the state.The primary goals include preventing the spread of new invasive species into the state, as well as managing those alreadyestablished. Management of invasive fish in Minnesota has been limited mainly to control of common carp. As more invasive fishspecies become established in the state, new technologies need to be considered as potential management strategies. A majorconcern is that the technologies will not do more harm than good. This basic premise of risk will drive decision-making related toregulating the use of technologies in the state.

Session: Economics: Evaluating Market & Non-MarketCosts of Invasive Fish

Wednesday: 1:10 P.M.Title: Economics: Evaluating Market & Non-Market Costs of Invasive FishSpeaker: Frances Homans, Applied Economics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MinnesotaDescription: In analyses that attempt to estimate the costs of species invasions, reporting the costs of management or multiplyingper-unit costs by the number affected have been typical in arriving at a total. These estimates are of limited value for most policyquestions. Starting with a careful definition of the most important policy questions in this area, this paper examines the marginsover which costs should be estimated and outlines several useful estimation methods. The roles of adaptation, mitigation, andpopulation growth have particular relevance and will be highlighted.

Session: State Level – Arizona Wednesday: 11:20 A.M.Title: Considerations of State Authorities and Responsibilities with Regard to the Introduction and Use of Genetically ModifiedOrganisms for Genetic Biocontrol of Undesired SpeciesSpeaker: Larry Riley, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, ArizonaDescription: Emerging genetic biocontrol technologies are intriguing and may present themselves as uniquely useful tools forwildlife managers for addressing species invasions or nuisance species, but the employment of such technologies may raise issuesand complexities that some may not see on the surface. State wildlife agencies are the stewards of wildlife within their state borders,and have statutory authority over conservation of their stateʼs wildlife and the lawful import, possession, and stocking of aquaticwildlife (fish). Employing a genetic biocontrol technology that involves the release of animals to the wild or risks escape to the wildmust require approval or denial by the state wildlife agency. Ideally, on any such undertaking the state wildlife agency would eitherbe the lead in making the decision to utilize this technology or a major cooperator. State wildlife agencies are viewed by the public asthe stewards of wildlife, and public concerns about employing genetically modified organisms for biocontrol will inevitably be pointedat the state. The states need to be prepared with a clear understanding of the benefits, risks, and societal concerns associated withthis technology to position themselves to make good decisions about the use of the technology. Genetically modified plants andanimals generate lots of images in the minds of the public, and many of them are negative and fearful. State wildlife agencies willhave to be armed–not only to make good decisions about the use of this technology–but to inform and educate the public about it,engage the public in dialogue that leads to decision-making about the use of such technologies, and balance positions and decisionsbased upon sound scientific information, sound social science information, and full public engagement. The federal “Framework” fordetermining which federal department, agency or bureau takes leadership on issues associated with genetically manipulatedorganisms should be carefully examined. If a genetic biocontrol technology includes intentional release to the wild, it is unclearwhether federal review and approval would recognize state authorities and responsibilities in that process. While some states havetaken steps to ensure their ability to regulate the use of genetically manipulated wildlife, many are unprepared. Errors in judgment or lapses in federal and state decision processes regarding use of biocontrol technology can render it socially unacceptable.

Session: Economics: Evaluating Market & Non-MarketCosts of Invasive Fish

Wednesday: 1:10 P.M.Title: Economics: Evaluating Market & Non-Market Costs of Invasive FishSpeaker: Brian Leung, McGill University, Montreal, QuebecDescription: Estimates of the economic and environmental costs of invasive species are needed to inform policy and providejustification for management decisions. Unfortunately, information is typically scarce, uncertainty high, and approaches limited. Thissession will briefly survey three projects: (1) a bioeconomic model for an invasive species (Dreissena polymorpha); (2) analysis ofquantitative information on impacts known for aquatic invasive species in general; (3) a framework to integrate the information thatis available, to estimate the cost of suites of invaders.

Chris J. Benson

22 23

GGeenneettiicc BBiiooccoonnttrrooll ooff IInnvvaassiivvee FFiisshh ((SSPPOONNSSOORRSS))International Symposium on

Dartmouth CollegeDartmouth College has forged a singular identity. A member of the Ivy League, Dartmouthis a small, student-centered, undergraduate and graduate college, with three leadingprofessional schools - Dartmouth Medical School, Thayer School of Engineering, and theTuck School of Business. It is known for its commitment to excellence in undergraduateeducation. Dartmouth also awards degrees through the doctorate in 17 Arts and Sciencesgraduate programs and the professional schools.

Gila River Basin Native Fishes Conservation ProgramThe Gila River Basin Native Fishes Conservation Program is an effort among the Bureau ofReclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Arizona and New Mexico Departmentsof Game and Fish to undertake conservation actions (recovery and protection) forfederal/state-listed or candidate fish species native to the Gila River basin by implementingexisting and future recovery plans for those fish.

Great Lakes Protection FundThe Great Lakes Protection Fund is a private, not-for-profit corporation. The Governors ofthe Great Lakes states created the Fund in 1989 to be a permanent source of financialsupport for innovative regional efforts to protect and restore the health of the Great Lakesecosystem. The Fund provides support in the form of grants, loans, and other investments.

Introduced Species and Genotypes–IGERT ProgramThe University of Minnesota Integrative Graduate Education and Research TraineeshipProgram prepares Ph.D. students to conduct research that will improve Ecological RiskAnalysis and contribute practical solutions to the challenges surrounding the management of introduced species and genotypes. It also provides summer research opportunities forundergraduates to work with the faculty and students.

Minnesota Sea GrantMinnesota Sea Grant funds research and provides public education, in part, on harmfulaquatic invasive species. Itʼs extension, education and communication experts developtools to help people learn how to prevent and minimize the impacts of aquatic invaders.Established in 1975, it is part of a nationwide network of 30 university-based programsadministered through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The Mississippi River Basin Panel on Aquatic Nuisance SpeciesThe Mississippi River Basin Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species (MRBP) is one of sixregional panels established by the Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) Task Force to implementthe Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 and the NationalInvasive Species Act of 1996. The MRBP has been hosted by the Mississippi InterstateCooperative Resource Association (MICRA) since it was formed in 2003. The 26 MississippiRiver Basin states work together through MICRA and the MRBP to prevent introductions ofANS; minimize their economic and ecological impacts; develop and implement environmentallysound control methods; develop and disseminate information; and establish a research andtechnology program. The MRBP includes members of federal, state, and local governmentagencies, as well as private and commercial environmental and economic stakeholdergroups.

Murray-Darling Basin AuthorityThe Murray-Darling Basin Authority is responsible for planning the integrated managementof water resources of the vast Murray-Darling Basin – Australiaʼs food bowl. The Authorityʼsprincipal aim is to manage the Basinʼs water resources in the national interest.

GGeenneettiicc BBiiooccoonnttrrooll ooff IInnvvaassiivvee FFiisshh ((SSPPOONNSSOORRSS CCOONNTT..))International Symposium on

U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of ReclamationThe mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water andrelated resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest ofthe American public. Through leadership, use of technical expertise, efficient operations,responsive customer service and the creativity of people, Reclamation will seek to protectlocal economies and preserve natural resources and ecosystems through the effective useof water.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceThe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the only agency of the U.S. Government whose primaryresponsibility is the conservation of the nationʼs fish, wildlife, and plants. Because of itsresponsibilities, the Service is very concerned about the impacts that invasive species haveacross the nation. Invasive plants and animals have many impacts on fish and wildliferesources. Invasive species degrade, change or displace native habitats, compete withnative wildlife, and are harmful to fish, wildlife and plant resources.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service CAP Transfer ProgramThe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service CAP Transfer Program works to protect endangeredand threatened species, migratory birds, and freshwater fish and wildlife habitat in Arizona.It also works with many other private and public partners to preserve and protect livingresources of Arizona ecosystems.

USDA Biotechnology Risk Assessment Grant ProgramThe purpose of the USDA Biotechnology Risk Assessment Grants Program is to assistfederal regulatory agencies in making science-based decisions about the effects ofintroducing genetically engineered organisms into the environment.

Steering Committee Members:Anne Kapuscinski (Chair), Sherman Fairchild Distinguished Professor of Sustainability Science, Dartmouth College & former SeaGrant Extension Specialist, University of Minnesota

Dan Ashe, Science Advisor to the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Jim Barrett, Director, Native Fish Strategy, Murray-Darling Basin Authority

Robert Clarkson, Fishery Biologist, U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation

Doug Duncan, Fish Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region

Jeff Gunderson, Director, Minnesota Sea Grant

Michael Hoff, Aquatic Invasive Species Program Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-Midwest and Representative fromMississippi River Basin Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species

K. Bruce Jones, Chief Scientist for Biology, U.S. Geological Survey

Glen Knowles, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region

Weiming Li, Professor, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife and Department of Physiology and Neuroscience, Michigan State University

Marshall Meyers, Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council

Leah Sharpe (Symposium Coordinator), Ph.D. Candidate, Conservation Biology Program, University of Minnesota & National ScienceFoundation IGERT Trainee in Risk Analysis of Introduced Species and Genotypes