Risk management to prioritise the eradication of new and emerging invasive non-native species

Booy, Olaf; Mill, Aileen C.; Roy, Helen E.; Hiley, Alice; Moore, Niall; Robertson, Pete; Baker, Simon; Brazier, M.; Bué, Mathilde; Bullock, Richard; Campbell, Steve; Eyre, Dominic; Foster, Jim; Hatton‐Ellis, M.; Long, Jo; Macadam, Craig R.; Morrison-Bell, Camilla; Mumford, John; Newman, J. R.; Parrott, Dave; Payne, Robin; Renals, Trevor; Rodgers, Eoina; Spencer, Mark A.; Stebbing, Paul; Sutton-Croft, Mike; Walker, Kevin J.; Ward, Alastair I.; Whittaker, Stan; Wyn, Gabe

doi:10.1007/s10530-017-1451-z

Cited by 97 publications

(170 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

161

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Incorporating estimates of the proportion of areas with new invasions into risk assessment methodology is useful for prioritizing resource allocation (Gallardo and Aldridge , Booy et al. ) and providing decision‐support tools such as systematic conservation planning (McIntosh et al. ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for heterogeneous invasion rates reveals management impacts on the spatial expansion of an invasive species

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Success of large‐scale control programs for established invasive species is challenging to evaluate because of spatial variability in expansion rates, management techniques, and the strength of management intensity. For a well‐established invasive species in the spreading phase of invasion, a useful metric of impact is the magnitude by which control slows the rate of spatial spread. The prevention of spatial spreading likely results in substantial benefits in terms of ecosystem or economic damage that is prevented by an expanding invasive species. To understand how local management actions could impact the spatial spread of an established invasive species, we analyzed distribution and management data for feral swine across contiguous United States using occupancy analysis. We quantified changes in the rate of spatial expansion of feral swine and its relationship to local management actions. We found that after 4 yr of enhanced control, invasion probability decreased by 8% on average relative to pre‐program rates. This decrease was as high as 15% on average in states with low‐density populations of feral swine. The amount of decrease in invasion rate was attributed to removal intensity in neighboring counties and depended on the extent of neighboring counties with feral swine (spatial heterogeneity in local invasion pressure). Although we did not find a significant overall increase in the probability of elimination, increased elimination probability tended to occur in regions with low invasion pressure. Accounting for spatial heterogeneity in invasion pressure was important for quantifying management impacts (i.e., the relationship between management intensity and spatial spreading processes) because management impacts changed depending on the strength of invasion pressure from neighboring counties. Predicting reduction in spatial spread of an invasive species is an important first step in valuation of overall damage reduction for invasive species control programs by providing estimates of where a species may be, and thus which natural and agricultural resources would be affected, if the control program had not been operating. For minimizing losses from spatial expansion of an invasive species, our framework can be used for adaptive resource prioritization to areas where spatial expansion and underlying damage potential are concurrently highest.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for heterogeneous invasion rates reveals management impacts on the spatial expansion of an invasive species

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Risk management is a tool for prioritization of IAS, used together with risk assessment. A risk management scheme, developed by Booy et al (), uses seven key criteria: Effectiveness, Practicality, Cost, Impact, Acceptability, Opportunity window and Likelihood of re‐invasion.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A practical tool for assessing ecosystem services enhancement and degradation associated with invasive alien species

Martinez‐Cillero

Willcock

Perez‐Diaz

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current approaches for assessing the effects of invasive alien species (IAS) are biased toward the negative effects of these species, resulting in an incomplete picture of their real effects. This can result in an inefficient IAS management. We address this issue by describing the INvasive Species Effects Assessment Tool (INSEAT) that enables expert elicitation for rapidly assessing the ecological consequences of IAS using the ecosystem services (ES) framework. INSEAT scores the ecosystem service “gains and losses” using a scale that accounted for the magnitude and the reversibility of its effects. We tested INSEAT on 18 IAS in Great Britain. Here, we highlighted four case studies: Harmonia axyridis (Harlequin ladybird), Astacus leptodactylus (Turkish crayfish), Pacifastacus leniusculus (Signal crayfish) and Impatiens glandulifera (Himalayan balsam). The results demonstrated that a collation of different experts’ opinions using INSEAT could yield valuable information on the invasive aliens’ ecological and social effects. The users can identify certain IAS as ES providers and the trade‐offs between the ES provision and loss associated with them. This practical tool can be useful for evidence‐based policy and management decisions that consider the potential role of invasive species in delivering human well‐being.

show abstract

“…There is no single approach for incorporating uncertainty into decision‐making that is universally applicable to all stages of the invasion process, and different approaches may be demanded to inform effective action at each stage. We advocate the following: Prior to invasions, existing information can be used to inform risk assessments (Mumford et al ) and risk management evaluations (Booy et al ), and uncertainty should be semi‐quantified into confidence scores by expert opinion in order to prioritise potential invasives for eradication. These processes have been specifically designed to facilitate decision‐making by non‐specialists. When an invasion is suspected, or if confirmation of the likely absence of a potential invader is required, occupancy estimation can be used to quantify the probability of absence and likely geographic range of the invasive, with uncertainty estimated probabilistically (Mackenzie et al ).…”

Section: Solutions To Uncertainty For the Control Of Invasivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using and communicating uncertainty for the effective control of invasive non‐native species

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estimates of quantities needed to plan invasive species control, such as population size, are always uncertain; this is an issue that can become a problem when mishandled in ecological science and its communication. The complexities of incorporating uncertainty into sophisticated decision‐support tools may be a barrier to their use by decision makers, leading to decisions being made without due regard to uncertainty and risking misplaced certainty of predicted outcomes. We summarise ways in which uncertainty has been incorporated into and used to advise decisions on the management of invasive non‐native species and other problem species, and offer a simple conceptual model for accommodating and using uncertainty at the planning stage. We also demonstrate how frequently uncertainty has been misused and miscommunicated in the wildlife management literature. We contend that uncertainty in estimates of natural quantities must be acknowledged, can inform decisions and can be made to derive decisions, and should not be ignored if invasive species policy is to be delivered effectively. Uncertainty must be communicated thoroughly and correctly by scientists if decision makers are to understand its consequences for planning and resourcing control programmes.

show abstract

Risk management to prioritise the eradication of new and emerging invasive non-native species

Abstract: Robust tools are needed to prioritise the management of invasive non-native species

Cited by 97 publications

References 57 publications

Accounting for heterogeneous invasion rates reveals management impacts on the spatial expansion of an invasive species

Accounting for heterogeneous invasion rates reveals management impacts on the spatial expansion of an invasive species

A practical tool for assessing ecosystem services enhancement and degradation associated with invasive alien species

Using and communicating uncertainty for the effective control of invasive non‐native species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About