A Review of Common Factors among Successful and Failed Efforts to Eradicate Invasive Vertebrates in Florida

Abstract

Species invasions can alter ecosystems, decimate populations of native species, facilitate the spread of infectious diseases, and threaten industries like fisheries and agriculture. Significant resources and financial investments are often directed towards invasive species management (ISM) to prevent future introductions, to remove smaller populations, and to contain expanding populations. While prevention is the most important goal of ISM, focus may shift to removal (eradication) when prevention fails. Eradication attempts are costly and have not been inclusive of all invasive populations. These efforts are inherently difficult because they require an abundance of resources, must be executed before the population expands, can be disrupted by public opposition, and often require years of monitoring to confirm success. Regardless, even failed eradication attempts provide important lessons to potentially improve future eradication efforts. This review of 20 case studies in Florida assesses successful and failed eradication attempts to identify common factors that contributed to each outcome. More than half of the detailed failed eradication attempts either lacked communication from or were outright disrupted by stakeholders. Most successful eradications targeted fish or small mammals and removed <200 individuals. Nearly half of the successful eradications occurred on islands or within isolated bodies of water. Despite the abundance of invasive herpetofauna in Florida, there has yet to be a documented successful eradication effort targeting these species. While many barriers exist to publishing eradication outcomes, future eradication efforts should prioritize documentation to provide guidance to similar efforts. Future research should address the role of media coverage and outreach efforts regarding eradication success, especially efforts targeting charismatic species.