Removing vessels from the water for biofouling treatment has the potential to introduce mobile non-indigenous marine species

Management implications of the influence of biological variability of invasive lionfish diet in Belize

“…They often have long layover times in marinas, and thus remain stationary for extended periods of time during which substantial fouling can occur ). Yachts also tend to travel at slower speeds compared to other vessels and owners have less incentive to maintain their antifouling paints (Coutts et al 2010;Brine et al 2013) except for the case of racing yachts. In addition, there are no international regulations that address the problem of yacht fouling although Australia and New Zealand have national initiatives in place (Commonwealth of Australia 2013).…”

“…The cleaning of hulls when vessels are in the water dislodges organisms, allowing them to settle and establish on surrounding infrastructure (Hopkins and Forrest 2008;Woods et al 2012). Even when vessels are removed from the water for cleaning, many individuals find their way back into the water as disposal of removed fouling is not always adequate, while mobile species may be disturbed and remain in the water when vessels are removed (Coutts et al 2010;Woods et al 2012). Despite the importance of this driver of introductions it was not possible to consider hull cleaning in this study, as all harbours considered undertake such maintenance, precluding this factor from driving differences among harbours.…”

“…Organisms are able to settle and establish on artificial substrates of harbours and vessels (Minchin et al 2006) and when the latter are moved, these biota are transferred to new regions (Minchin and Gollasch 2003). While some organisms are unable to survive transit, many persist with the potential of being introduced to new regions (Coutts et al 2010). Biofouling was previously managed through the use of Tributyltin (TBT) paints (Smith et al 2008) but due to negative effects on non-target organisms the use thereof has been progressively regulated since 1987 (IMO 1999), with an international ban through the Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling effective since 2008.…”

A Method for Evaluating the Efficacy of Antifouling Paints Using Mytilus galloprovincialis in the Laboratory in a Flow-Through System

“…Antifouling (AF) paints should be evaluated and selected from the viewpoint of fuel consumption efficiency and effectiveness in preventing the attachment of marine fouling organisms on ships [1–5]. However, the attachment of unwanted aquatic species is strongly influenced by region, season [6–8], and usage of vessels [9–11], and suitable applications of AF paints rely on expert recommendation.…”

Activities and vectors responsible for the biological pollution in the Taranto Seas (Mediterranean Sea, southern Italy): a review

“…They are sure to play a significant role in secondary spreading after introduction, since fragments of alien algae for instance can be dispersed both by weighing anchor and by cleaning boat hulls in seawater. To prevent this, vessel removal from the water prior to hull cleaning in maintenance facilities is considered the safest method, even though Coutts et al (2010) suggested that, at least for mobile animals, this practice can be unsuccessful as organisms escape during dry-docking procedures. In New Zealand, where the problems of alien introduction by recreational boating have had a considerable impact, specific recommendations have already been formulated (Ashton et al 2012), even leading Roche et al (2015) to propose a medium-cost solution consisting in an in-water encapsulation system that could be useful for recreational vessel biosecurity.…”