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

Abstract

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.

A systematic review of adaptive wildlife management for the control of invasive, non‐native mammals, and other human–wildlife conflicts

“…If this pattern of publication reflects the pattern of INNS management, then despite the many advantages offered by AM, it is only being adopted very infrequently and without all the recommended elements. Perhaps there are so few examples of AM being applied to INNS because few researchers have considered the importance of uncertainty when managing INNS (Rout et al , Ward et al ). Uncertainty in INNS management arises due to many reasons, including variation in the efficiency of trapping devices or immunocontraceptive vaccines (e.g.…”

“…In complex ecological systems, predicting the optimal management intervention among a range of options is difficult, often due to a range of unknowns and uncertainties (Ward et al ). Uncertainties may arise from environmental variation, sampling variation or the response of populations to the management methods.…”

The challenges of long‐term invasive mammal management: lessons from the UK

“…Landscape‐scale models of habitat suitability and population dynamics can help prioritise management action. However, these approaches require understanding of species dispersal and habitat requirements to be able to predict where in the landscape species present the greatest risk, or knowledge of population parameters such as survival and fecundity rates, to assess the level and type of management required to prevent further population growth (Ward et al ).…”

Quantitative Spatial Ecology to Promote Human-Wildlife Coexistence: A Tool for Integrated Landscape Management

“…While acknowledging that financial resources are often limited to carry out management actions (Richardson et al, 2020), the identification of cost-effective management interventions among a range of options can be difficult due to the multiple unknowns and uncertainties that characterize complex ecological systems (Ward et al, 2020). Understanding, predicting and controlling animal movement is key to designing anthropogenic landscapes that minimize the risk of negative interactions or maximize positive experience with wildlife.…”