Public Reaction to Invasive Plant Species in a Disturbed Colorado Landscape

Abstract

Invasive plant species degrade ecosystems in many ways. Controlling invasive plants is costly for government agencies, businesses, and individuals. North central Colorado is currently experiencing large-scale disturbance, and millions of acres are vulnerable to invasion because of natural and socioeconomic processes. Mountain pine beetles typically endemic to this region have reached epidemic proportions, with up to 80% tree mortality, which opens growing space for invasive plants. In socioeconomic terms, the popularity of this amenity-rich region for tourists and in-migrants has resulted in increased development, often bordering the public land that is common in the American West. Increased recreational access and the construction of new roads and infrastructure disturb ecosystems in an increasingly fragmented landscape. A survey was mailed to more than 4,000 households in a five-county region of north central Colorado to gauge public awareness and attitudes regarding invasive plant species, helping to illuminate whether the public shows a capacity to help land managers detect and respond to invasive plants before they profoundly alter the local ecosystem. Although 88% of respondents had heard or read about invasive plant species, far fewer were familiar with specific, locally targeted species, and fewer still had taken any action to control these species. The overall awareness and concern about invasive plants in the area indicated a capacity for more public participation in management.

Assessing Stakeholder Perspectives on Invasive Plants to Inform Risk Analysis

“…Our results resembled those of Daab and Flint's (2010) study of the general public in Colorado, who also agreed that invasive plants were a concern. Our stakeholder groups differed somewhat in how strongly they perceived invasive plants to be a problem.…”

“…Colton and Alpert (1998) concluded that public awareness and understanding of biological invasions by plants was poor, and Steele et al (2006) found that only 34% of West Virginia woodland landowner respondents had heard or read information about invasive plants. However, more recently Daab and Flint (2010) reported 88% of the general public in Colorado had heard or read about invasive plants. Our respondents in Iowa were very aware of the term ''invasive plant,'' and the majority also demonstrated comprehension of its meaning with their write-in answers.…”

“…This aspect of risk analysis for invasive plants has received less attention than has risk-assessment model development. Some surveys have been conducted on attitudes towards invasive plants (e.g., Andreau et al 2009;Bardsley and Edwards-Jones 2006;Bremer and Park 2007;Burt et al 2007;Colton and Alpert 1998;Daab and Flint 2010;García-Llorente et al 2008;Peters et al 2006), but similar efforts are lacking with respect to risk-assessment modeling and determining what stakeholders deem as acceptable risk. These previous surveys suggest that there are differences of opinion about invasive plants that could present challenges for the effective application of risk-assessment models.…”

Part of the solution? Stakeholder awareness, information and engagement in tree health issues

“…A study (Hunter 2011) on local residents' responses to the loss of street trees from Emerald Ash Borer in Michigan did not actively assess levels of awareness but the study does highlight that proximity to tree loss had an impact on residents increasing their engagement with stewardship activities. Daab and Flint (2010) investigated awareness of the spread of invasive plants following an outbreak of MPB in Colorado (Daab and Flint 2010). The authors surveyed 1,346 residents across nine communities in north-central Colorado.…”

“…For example, 68 % of consumers in horticultural-oriented internet discussion forums that were familiar with the issues around invasive plants had read about them in magazines and newspapers (Reichard and White 2001), while plantbuyers surveyed by Kelley et al (2006) first found out about invasive plants via television (27.4 %), newspapers, magazines and books (19.8 %), friends, family and neighbours (9.4 %), garden clubs (7.5 %) and garden centres and nurseries (7.1 %). Daab and Flint (2010) found that the most common source of information on invasive plants for residents in North Colorado was newspapers (67.8 %), followed by 'word of mouth' (50.3 %), 'my own observations' (49.5 %) and the 'County extension office' (38.2 %). Twelve further sources of information were identified by this study.…”