Author 's co hand-harvesting of the relatively low-density mussels was the best solution Diving at the site to remove all visible zebra mussels began and has been ongo- ing since April 2, 2000. This approach has been extremely labor intensive and while hopefully effective, would not be feasible if multiple sites were found throughout lake geor Currently, a number of activities are being continued at Lake George, in- cluding monitoring and removal of any remaining zebra mussels at this site Removal of any remaining zebra mussels is critical to reduce the likelihood of successful reproduction. In addition, mussels that are not removed may adapt to the lower calcium and ph conditions and spread into surrounding areas Water samples are continuing to be checked for microscopic larvae and chem- ical parameters. This information will be used to evaluate success of removal efforts, determine whether to extend the monitoring area beyond the present site and better understand the local water chemistry. As can be seen from the abovestory, the questions asked in this years contest-examining environmental factors that could influence the spread of zebra mussels and the potential impacts of human activities and policy issues are real ones. I read with great interest the solutions provided by this years teams. In fact, i plan to reread a number of them as we continue to work on these research questions Proactive vs. Reactive There are many ways in which we can be proactive against the potential threat and spread of zebra mussels. Perhaps of primary importance is education of individuals, through which it is hoped that the spread of zebra mussels can be reduced. The primary mode by which zebra mussels are transported to new bodies of water or to new locations within single water bodies is by human activities: mussels attached to boat bottoms or veligers hitching a ride in bait buckets or scuba gear, for example. Therefore education can be viewed preventive measure for the spread of zebra mussels A second critical activity is monitoring for the first appearance of zebra mussel larvae(veligers), young juvenile mussels and adult zebra mussels Of course, the earlier the detection, the better the opportunity to minimize widespread colonization. Thus, monitoring programs are paramount in being proactive about zebra mussel infestations Third, and to the point of the contest question, there is a need for develop ment of mathematical models that can be made robust using the numerous data sets that already exist for water bodies that either have or lack zebra mussels These models may then be used to predict possible new infestations within wa ter bodies potentially in jeopardy of zebra mussel introductions. At the time of the contest only three such models had been published in the scientific lit- erature. To have interdisciplinary student teams and worldwide focus on this important issue was a fantastic opportunity.Author’s Commentary 423 hand-harvesting of the relatively low-density mussels was the best solution. Diving at the site to remove all visible zebra mussels began and has been ongo￾ing since April 2, 2000. This approach has been extremely labor intensive and, while hopefully effective, would not be feasible if multiple sites were found throughout Lake George. Currently, a number of activities are being continued at Lake George, in￾cluding monitoring and removal of any remaining zebra mussels at this site. Removal of any remaining zebra mussels is critical to reduce the likelihood of successful reproduction. In addition, mussels that are not removed may adapt to the lower calcium and pH conditions and spread into surrounding areas. Water samples are continuing to be checked for microscopic larvae and chem￾ical parameters. This information will be used to evaluate success of removal efforts, determine whether to extend the monitoring area beyond the present site and better understand the local water chemistry. As can be seen from the above “story,” the questions asked in this year’s contest—examining environmental factors that could influence the spread of zebra mussels and the potential impacts of human activities and policy issues— are real ones. I read with great interest the solutions provided by this year’s teams. In fact, I plan to reread a number of them as we continue to work on these research questions. Proactive vs. Reactive There are many ways in which we can be proactive against the potential threat and spread of zebra mussels. Perhaps of primary importance is education of individuals, through which it is hoped that the spread of zebra mussels can be reduced. The primary mode by which zebra mussels are transported to new bodies of water or to new locations within single water bodies is by human activities: mussels attached to boat bottoms, or veligers hitching a ride in bait buckets or scuba gear, for example. Therefore education can be viewed as a preventive measure for the spread of zebra mussels. A second critical activity is monitoring for the first appearance of zebra mussel larvae (veligers), young juvenile mussels and adult zebra mussels. Of course, the earlier the detection, the better the opportunity to minimize a widespread colonization. Thus, monitoring programs are paramount in being proactive about zebra mussel infestations. Third, and to the point of the contest question, there is a need for develop￾ment of mathematical models that can be made robust using the numerous data sets that already exist for water bodies that either have or lack zebra mussels. These models may then be used to predict possible new infestations within wa￾ter bodies potentially in jeopardy of zebra mussel introductions. At the time of the contest only three such models had been published in the scientific lit￾erature. To have interdisciplinary student teams and worldwide focus on this important issue was a fantastic opportunity