Since the discovery of quagga mussels in the Snake River, and the quick response from the Idaho State Department of Agriculture to eradicate the problem, we asked Lloyd Knight, deputy director, a few post-treatment questions.
When the treatment is concluded, is there a plan to reestablish the fish and aquatic life in the treatment zone?
KNIGHT: Regarding fish, I will let Idaho Fish and Game Department handle any answers related to fish populations and what stocking activity they see in their future, if any. Observations are that the treatment didn’t kill "all" fish. But I am sure they will be assessing what any next steps need to be in that arena. It’s much the same answer for aquatic plants. Certainly, there has been a short-term impact, but the river isn’t by any means “sterile” because of the treatment. We saw aquatic noxious weeds that have certainly been impacted, but all plant life will likely recover at some point.
Since previous precautions did not (could not … ) totally prevent infestation of the quagga mussel, are any changes to the current prevention measures planned?
KNIGHT: No prevention program is ever 100%. We know that watercraft have bypassed inspection stations as they enter the state, either by choice, by accident or by traveling when a station is closed. In addition, we know that there are some watercraft that we never see because they might be stored in a trailer or some other carrier, as can be the case with several non-motorized watercraft. However, the prevention program has always included two key pieces – watercraft inspection at roadsides and a comprehensive statewide surveillance program.
In this case, the routine surveillance of water bodies is what caught this infestation. The monitoring program has always been designed to ensure multiple sampling events throughout the season in water bodies across the state. The goal has always been to find any infestation early enough to both contain the infestation and to provide as many options as possible to treat and eradicate infestations. In that way, we think the prevention activities succeeded; we have at least had the opportunity to eradicate this new infestation. Our Rapid Response Plan has also been a key component, and our actions would have been severely limited without a robust prevention program and Rapid Response Plan in place.
We always end a season with an evaluation of our efforts and a realistic assessment of what we can do better. This year won’t be any different. It may have given us more to analyze and talk about, but we will continue the same assessment and decision-making process that we have since the program’s inception.
Do 'home test kits' (excuse the reference to COVID-19) exist for farmers, canal companies or others to watch for infestations? Is that even an option?
KNIGHT: No. Routing statewide surveillance with trained expert analysis to identify these species is the best way to ensure an accurate assessment of the presence of a mussel infestation. While some analysis tools such as eDNA can tell you there is a presence of the DNA of mussels, it can’t pinpoint the location, whether the mussel is dead or alive, and it won’t let you identify any viability. Our current surveillance method includes identifying an actual mussel under a microscope and confirming that identification through genetic testing.
.jpg?t=1687979285&width=640){kind=logo}
