Belgium
Completed by: Sea Alarm (Non-governmental organisation)
Regional Agreement:
SAT results
Belgium
Other countries *
Regional agreement **
Preparedness levels
 
To be initiated
 
Important gaps
 
Strong basis
 
Excellent
* Average values of all SAT completed on the SAT portal/site
** Average values of all SAT completed by countries within the Regional Agreement

Planning and integration

OWR Plan

Only an oil spill response plan exists; it may or may not have reference to OWR
It is recognised that OWR needs a plan; meetings have taken place, but no draft document written as yet
A mature plan has been developed on the basis of scenario analysis, but not (fully) formalised or integrated as yet
OWR plan formalised and fully integrated with all relevant oil spill plans (at sea response, coastal response, regional plans), and implemented via a multi-year programme and budget

Authority engagement

No authority so far has taken responsibility to oversee (the quality of) wildlife response and preparedness
One authority has taken responsibility to take a lead on plan development, but other relevant authorities are not engaging as yet
All relevant authorities are engaged with the OWR plan, by formal decision
Annual activities demonstrate full commitment with all signatories of the plan and significant preparedness improvements thanks to training and exercises in which all signatories participate

Risk Management

There is no common rationale for (the development of) an integrated OWR plan.
A scenario/risk analysis has resulted in a clear picture of what is needed and who needs to do what
All relevant parties (Authority-NGO-Private) have been brought around the table and have divided and agreed roles, responsibilities and development tasks
Progressively the preparedness is increasing according to plan and agreed budget; Risks are managed

Exercises

Programming and design

No OWR exercises take place
Exercises have had an ad hoc character and were not related to a plan or training programme
Exercises take place coherently every year and look at different aspects of a response
Exercises take place according to a pre-defined schedule that directly relates to the agreed plan

Multi-stakeholder involvement

There is no actor who is interested to organise OWR exercises
Wildlife aspects are exercised by one or more parties but not by everyone together
Exercises are attended by all stakeholders together but there is no clear relation with training
Wildlife aspects are exercised by all stakeholders together and aiming at letting trained officers working their assigned roles

Types and levels

The importance of exercises such as table tops, field exercises and facility exercises is acknowledged but not acted upon
Ad hoc exercises were limited to table tops and/or simple field exercises
Exercises are structural, but a large mobilisation exercise testing the build-up and operations of a facility has not been held to date
There is a full diversity of scheduled exercises (table top, field, facility) as part of a formal plan-related exercise programme

Training

Roles and responsibilities

Roles and responsibilities in a wildlife response are not clarified and not discussed between stakeholders
Some but not all stakeholders have assumed their roles in a wildlife response and train their key personnel to be able to take responsibilities according to clear job descriptions
Roles and responsibilities are defined as job descriptions as part of an agreed plan and a training programme has been agreed and is centrally coordinated, delivering key personnel from different organisations
Trained personnel from different stakeholder organisations are offered regular opportunities to exercise together, to practice their skills in realistic scenarios

Hands-on vs manager

There is no in-country expertise available to provide training courses
The need for training at different levels (hands-on or managers) is recognised, but actual training is limited to basic hands-on (e.g. volunteers) only level
Training is recognised and taking place for both hands-on personnel and managers
A centrally coordinated training programme aims to deliver responders at all levels and ensure various individuals can take key roles in the higher management positions

International standards usage

There are parties interested in being trained
Training is provided, but not to international standards
Training packages aim at international standards, and an increasing number of staff is already qualified
Trained staff are fully qualified according to international standards and have reached levels where they can assist with training other responders or a response abroad

Equipment and facilities

Facility types

The role of facilities in OWR is recognised, but plans to realise them have not been developed or tested
It is clear what facilities are needed for different purposes in a wildlife response. At this stage, only small size facilities can be used or developed, equipped and staffed, serving only for relatively small incident scenarios
The use and development of facilities has been described in the plan and procedures and criteria are available for scaling up facility size to a desired maximum level that can be equipped and staffed
The use and development of fit-for-purpose facilities is the subject of specific exercises in an exercise programme in which the performance of contractors and responsible organisations is regularly tested and evaluated

Equipment evaluation and availability

Equipment stockpiles are unknown or absent
Equipment stockpiles are available in-country, but an analysis of their completeness has not been made
Equipment stockpiles and lists of equipment and consumables have been drawn up as well as an updated list of manufacturers and providers
Equipment mobilisation in relation to facility build up and field activities is regularly tested and evaluated as part of an exercise programme

Euthanasia (incl. mass euthanasia)

Euthanasia as a response option

Euthanasia has not been considered as an explicit response option, and resources not identified nor developed
Euthanasia is considered as a response option but guaranteed/contracted providers with certified resources are not in place
A plan includes species specific options for euthanasia, and certified resources for each have been identified and contracted
The plan for euthanasia is structurally and regularly exercised and demonstrate that the identified resources can also deal with worst case scenarios

Stakeholders and guidelines

No stakeholder discussions have been held to define criteria for euthanasia
Criteria (when and how) for euthanasia have been agreed between stakeholders but a risk-based gap-analyses has not been carried out
Agreed guidelines for euthanasia have been developed and provide guidance for different regions and worst-case scenarios
All stakeholders have agreed to the guidelines and well-developed communication strategies are in place for informing the public, not only in worst case scenarios

Partnering and funding

Funds and budgets

No dedicated central funds are explicitly available for wildlife preparedness development
Funds are available to the extent that some ad hoc activities can be financed; there is no multi-year approach nor budget available
A multi-year budget has been created to finance a number of activities, contracts and equipment investments. But it is still expected from various key stakeholders to contribute in-kind to the agreed preparedness level
A multi-year budget has been created that allows one or more key stakeholders to coordinate an all-encompassing programme and overseeing investments, training and exercises, and provide professional staff to undertake key roles and responsibilities in the management of a response; a key authority oversees that targets are met by the programme

Multi-stakeholder involvement

It is recognised that wildlife impacts or response can be controversial in terms of public reactions, but no multi-stakeholder activities have been organised to date to explore common ground and solutions
Multi-stakeholder meetings have been discussing wildlife impacts and options for a response, and it is clear that different views and approaches are possible, but no actions have been taken to find solutions in bridging different opinions
Multi-stakeholder processes have led to the agreed objectives and strategies for an OWR
A response will involve a broad range of stakeholders in the response activities, ensuring different viewpoints are respected and publicly communicated as of one voice so that the public is likely to support the response and its decision taking

International OWR Resources

There is a high reliance on OWR resources from abroad, but the procedures to invite and integrate responders from abroad have not been discussed or described
Oiled Wildlife Response resources from abroad that could assist, have been identified and discussions take place on mobilisation procedures, but no formal procedure has been agreed nor described
The assistance from OWR resources from abroad have been described as part of the wildlife response plan. Tier-3 mobilisation however is not part of an exercise programme
The assistance by OWR resources from abroad is described as part of the wildlife response plan and mobilisation procedures are regularly exercised and tested
 
Selected answers

Remarks

No remarks.