Keywords: Invasive species Ecosystem function Insect pests Invasive plants Ecological restoration Biological control Natural ecosystems a b s t r a c tOf the 70 cases of classical biological control for the protection of nature found in our review, there were fewer projects against insect targets (21) than against invasive plants (49), in part, because many insect biological control projects were carried out against agricultural pests, while nearly all projects against plants targeted invasive plants in natural ecosystems. Of 21 insect projects, 81% (17) provided benefits to protection of biodiversity, while 48% (10) protected products harvested from natural systems, and 5% (1) preserved ecosystem services, with many projects contributing to more than one goal. In contrast, of the 49 projects against invasive plants, 98% (48) provided benefits to protection of biodiversity, while 47% (23) protected products, and 25% (12) preserved ecosystem services, again with many projects contributing to several goals. We classified projects into complete control (pest generally no longer important), partial control (control in some areas but not others), and ''in progress," for projects in development for which outcomes do not yet exist. For insects, of the 21 projects discussed, 62% (13) achieved complete control of the target pest, 19% (4) provided partial control, and 43% (9) are still in progress. By comparison, of the 49 invasive plant projects considered, 27% (13) achieved complete control, while 33% (16) provided partial control, and 49% (24) are still in progress. For both categories of pests, some projects' success ratings were scored twice when results varied by region. We found approximately twice as many projects directed against invasive plants than insects and that protection of biodiversity was the most frequent benefit of both insect and plant projects. Ecosystem service protection was provided in the fewest cases by either insect or plant biological control agents, but was more likely to be provided by projects directed against invasive plants, likely because of the strong effects plants exert on landscapes. Rates of complete success appeared to be higher for insect than plant targets (62% vs 27%), perhaps because most often herbivores gradually weaken, rather than outright kill, their hosts, which is not the case for natural enemies directed against pest insects. For both insect and plant biological control, nearly half of all projects reviewed were listed as currently in progress, suggesting that the use of biological control for the protection of wildlands is currently very active.

No abstract

Parcel-level risk (PLR) describes how wildfire risk varies from home to home based on characteristics that relate to likely fire behavior, the susceptibility of homes to fire, and the ability of firefighters to safely access properties. Here, we describe the WiRē Rapid Assessment (RA), a parcel-level rapid wildfire risk assessment tool designed to evaluate PLR with a small set of measures for all homes in a community. We investigate the relationship between 2019 WiRē RA data collected in the Columbine Lake community in Grand County, Colorado, and whether assessed homes were destroyed in the 2020 East Troublesome Fire. We find that the overall parcel-level risk scores, as well as many individual attributes, relate to the chance that a home was destroyed. We also find strong evidence of risk spillovers across neighboring properties. The results demonstrate that even coarsely measured RA data capture meaningful differences in wildfire risk across a community. The findings also demonstrate the importance of accounting for multiple aspects of PLR, including both hazards and susceptibility, when assessing the risk of wildfire to homes and communities. Finally, the results underscore that relatively small actions by residents before a fire can influence wildfire outcomes.

Rink for your enthusiasm, support, and input into the planned case study projects. Thank you to Nicole DeCrappeo, Alisa Wade, and Aparna Bamzai-Dodson for your help determining how best to adapt when the pandemic and wildfires made the original project plan infeasible. Kendall Plapp created the figures. Aparna Bamzai-Dodson, James Meldrum, Corrie Knapp, and Tonya Haigh provided comments on earlier versions of this guidebook.

Wildfire affects many types of communities and is a particular concern for communities in the wildland urban interface (WUI), such as those of Teton County, Wyoming. The core intent of this project was to provide evidence to support the Teton Area Wildfire Protection Coalition (TAWPC) and affiliated organizations in their wildfire mitigation and education programming. This report analyzes existing wildfire risk data collected in fall 2020 and pairs it with social data collected in the winter and spring of 2021, in order to better understand residents' knowledge, experiences, and perceptions about wildfire risk. This greater understanding will help TAWPC focus its programs and outreach and ultimately promote increased mitigation and reduced wildfire risk in Teton County.The results of the wildfire risk assessment, covering 725 private residential properties in the study area, suggest that 89% face high, very high, or extreme risk of wildfire. In comparison, only 41% of residents estimated their risk of wildfire to be high, very high, or extreme (fig. 2). This suggests a "gap" between rapid assessment and survey estimates.Contributing to the risk assessment gap is the defensible space attribute. Most survey respondents (74%) thought they had at least 30 feet of defensible space, whereas rapid assessment estimated only 40% of properties to have more than 30 feet of defensible space. Furthermore, only 4% of survey respondents estimated their defensible space as less than 5 feet, while the rapid assessment placed 30% of properties in that category (fig. 10).