Invasive Species: Simple at First Glance

Invasive species issues seem simple at first glance. A species is introduced, establishes reproduces and begins to alter the new ecosystem, or negatively impacting human health and well being. Direct, strong adverse interactions that effect human health rise to the forefront of community awareness and efforts to reduce or eliminate the threat. Much is spent to prevent or ameliorate the introduction or control of invasive species such as:

Asian longhorned beetle (Anoplophora glabripennis)
Asian tiger mosquito (Aedes albopictus)
Brown citrus aphid (Toxoptera citricola)
Codling moth (Cydia pomonella)
Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata)
Cotton aphid (Aphis gossypii)
Diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella)
Emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis)
European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis)
Formosan subterranean termite (Coptotermes formosanus)
Glassy-winged sharpshooter (Homalodisca coagulata)
Gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar)
Hemlock wooly adelgid (Adelges tsugae)
Insect Biocontrol
Japanese beetle (Papillia japonica)
Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata)
Mexican fruit fly (Anastrepha ludens)
Oriental fruit fly (Bactrocera dorsalis)
Pink bollworm (Pectinophora gossypiella)
Pink hibiscus mealybug (Maconellicoccus hirsutus)
Red imported fire ant (Solenopsis invicta)
Russian wheat aphid (Diuraphis noxia)
Silverleaf whitefly (Bemisia argentifolii)
Wheat stem sawfly (Cephus cinctus)

Things get more complicated when the invasive species threat is not direct. The difficulties of the science, and the lack of absolutes, lead to statements of concern and even desperation as desired outcomes collide. Nan Wishner, Chair Emeritus of the City of Albany Integrated Pest Management Task Force and a member of the Stop the Spray East Bay Steering Committee writes that the total elimination “.. LBAM(light brown apple moth) is not feasible, the state plans to carry out a multi-year eradication program involving mass pesticide applications; that program’s first year cost an estimated $97 million.”

As the level of complication and complexities rise, the wicked inconvenience of invasive species issues seems to compel stakeholders to define their perceived problem in terms of their own unique a priori outcome desires. This means that each group of stakeholders has a slightly different working definition of invasive species making it very hard to reach consensus. The end game then becomes one of my way or the highway.

Any farmer or gardener will tell you that pests such as pathogens, insects and weeds are eternal; they do the best they can to control and eliminate the daily invasion that reduce monetary or aesthetic yield, knowing full well that the task is akin to sticking a finger in a dike. If farmers were to decide that weeds cannot be eliminated and gave up, we all would starve. Why then is it different when we set out to protect a natural area? Some would say we should just allow the invasion to create a new balance in time in a new, novel ecosystem and learn to live with it. In deed that is one option. It is the option of the property owner who chooses not to landscape, and cuts the brush around the buildings only to prevent fire and rodent damage. The neighbor who chooses to install and maintain an ornamental work landscape that requires endless removal of invaders is no less wrong in his choice than the former. So too our natural areas are like garden, rich in complexity and under constant and it would seem permanent attack. The issue at this level is one of limited resources as well as competing goals. Don’t use chemicals to control invaders in natural areas, and therefore allow a dramatically altered ecosystem, and deal with the unintended unexpected consequence later. Use chemical and reduce the impact, but suffer the affects of chemical pollution of air, earth or water.

So far we are speaking about the easy side of invasive species management and politics. Mark A. Davis writes in his new book, Invasion Biology, Oxford University Press, 2009, that ” …it is usually much easier to assess impact than it is to determine the series of ecological causes for it.” (White et a. 2006) Because current science has focused on the assessment of impact and not upon the mechanisms of ecological cause, certain stakeholders can reasonably claim that there is either no science or not enough science to support the dedication of resources. The present reliance on science as religion with the concurrent expectation that scientist-priests will rule on great issues ex cathedra and never ever change their minds fails to recognize that science is a tool for use in public discourse and public valuation exercises; science is not the end of the conversation but the beginning.

As Davis point out on page 151 of “Invasion Biology”, the ever-changing dynamic relationship between an ecosystem (itself ever-changing) and social systems (also in a constant state of flux) provides an overwhelming set of choices for environmental decision makers, land managers, and public policy deciders. Solutions and recommendations for invasive species will never be static and the casual observer will be endlessly confused. The tendency to throw up one’s hands in surrender will be powerful and the call to do nothing will be loud.

Controlling an invasive species or even eradicating it is most cost effective before it has actually done anything harmful. The idea that the LBAM should be allowed to spread because it has not yet wiped out a crop demonstrates the difficulty of getting people to care about something that has not actually happened yet. USDA has asked for more funding but because the problem is not pandemic begging is the order of the day. We as a society are loathe to spend money on something that has not happened yet. Better to wait til someone turns to crime and then incarcerate them than to pay less up front in education and work force development is our motto and so it is with invasive species

“Light brown apple moth is a recognized agricultural pest. Moths, such as light brown apple moth (LBAM) (Epiphyas postvittana), banana moth (Opogona sacchari), and nettle caterpillar (Darna pallivitta), are [known] pests of various tropical /subtropical crops, limiting production, and may severely disrupt trade if not detected and allowed to become established in primary growing areas. LBAM also attacks temperate crops and has recently been identified in California as a new invasive species. Because LBAM threatens a multibillion dollar industry in California, alone, CDFA and APHIS, have asked ARS scientists to help develop methods for LBAM control. Research Gaps including effective management of moth pests of tropical /subtropical crops requires the development of: 1) user-friendly, economical, and environmentally acceptable technologies; 2) area-wide integrated pest management (IPM) systems for moth suppression; and 3) systems approaches to prevent pest movement on export commodities.” (http://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Program/304/ActionPlan2008-2013/2h.pdf)

If gardeners waited until the weeds crowded out the tomatoes we would never have spaghetti sauce. Gardeners know that early detection and rapid response is the key to a a successful harvest and react without waiting to see if the scientist can publish; invasion of the garden are dealt with summarily. But on an ecosystem level we sometimes choose to wait until the kudzu covers the telephone poles of a million acres before buying the special machinery needed to keep the roads clear. We will carefully not try to reduce the level of the apple moth so that we have a reduction in chemical impact, as we loose the harvest of the fields, hoping that when the moth is finished it does not adapt to our natural areas and begin to be a factor in the wild fires of California as other invasive species already are. The call is to find consensus and to work together towards a common management goal using the tools of science and the techniques of IPM to reduce the toxicity of the solution and the level of the pest simultaneously.

Somehow we need to find away between do nothing at all and waiting until there is nothing to be done. But I digress…until another species catches my attention.

Bioeconomics of Invasive Species - A Reference for Stakeholders

July 19th (Bioeconomics_review), 2009 {Book provided to me without charge by UOP}
Invasive species issues have captured my attention for more than 15 years. I still remember wondering about the science behind the claim that Lythrum, purple loosestrife, was invasive; I still recall the confusion as to what exactly what an invasive species was. In a broader sense I have spent my time in invasive species problems trying to connect the various disciplines of current knowledge to each other. I wonder how cost is measured, and what is risk; how definitions are reached and who is responsible for developing them; where are the models that coordinate problem of scale both in time and space. Bridging the chasm between business opportunities and the costs of preserving or protecting the commonly held environmental infrastructure, as well as sorting through the semantic clutter of market preferences and public values, has been almost a fool’s errand at times.

Now a new book, ‘Bioeconomics of Invasive Species Integrating Ecology, Economics, Policy, and Management’, edited by Reuben P. Keller, David M. Lodge, Mark A. Lewis and Jason F. Shogren, has been released by Oxford University Press. Aimed at professional managers and policy makers, as well as researchers in the many related fields of invasive species, the book is invaluable for anyone involved in the on going debates and conversations. Contributors, numbering over 20, to the collection of academic papers include: Reuben P. Keller, a Postdoctoral Research Associate in the Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Notre Dame; David M. Lodge, Director of Center for Aquatic Conservation and Professor in the Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Notre Dame; Mark A. Lewis, Canada Research Chair in Mathematical Biology in the Department of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences at the University of Alberta; and, Jason F. Shogren, Stroock Professor of Natural Resource Conservation and Management in the Department of Economics and Finance at the University of Wyoming.

The book provides an in depth look at ecological and economic modeling theory and practice that can serve as a reference for the fields of risk assessment, early detection and rapid response, and control and management of invasive species. A convenient definition from the website, Bioeconomics: Mansour Mohammadian , lays out the scope of the book: “Bioeconomics is the discipline originating from the synthesis of biology and economics. It is an attempt to bridge, through the concept of holism and interdisciplinary methodology, the empirical culture of biology and the literary culture of economics and thus finish with what C.P. Snow has called " the two cultures. The paradigm shift is really an endeavour to make the invisible visible: in the case of bioeconomics the aim is to make visible all the weaknesses of the socioeconomic activity based on the neoclassical theory and the competitive capitalist ideology.” (© 2009 Mansour Mohammadian. All Rights Reserved. www.scienceofbioeconomics.com info@scienceofbioeconomics.com )

I have stood in the middle of more than I can count stakeholder arguments that are not about invasive species but rather ecology versus economy. The property rights conversation collides with the tragedy of the commons more often than not; the larger philosophic implications are hidden by the moment of the topic. Peter A. Corning, at the Institute for the Study of Complex Systems argues “… that an economy is at heart a "survival enterprise," the basic purpose of which is "earning a living" (whatever may be our perceptions -- and the exceptions) and that both "competition" and "co-operation" represent subsidiary, contingent "survival strategies." From this perspective, bioeconomic evolution may be characterized as a consequential change in a society's (or a species') mode of adaptation -- ie., in the means of production of the requisites for biological survival and reproduction. It entails the differential selection of alternative adaptive modalities (instrumentalities of needs satisfaction). (Peter A. Corning, Ph.D. Institute for the Study of Complex Systems Copyright © 2007 ISCS. All rights reserved.) In a nutshell, or, as the authors put it, in a clamshell, Bioeconomics of Invasive Species Integrating Ecology, Economics, Policy, and Management makes “...better informed outcomes possible.”

Organized into 13 chapters the book moves from descriptions of current fields of knowledge and perspectives of invasion biology to discussions of economic and ecologic integration. From there the authors investigate trait-based risk assessments and habitat niche modeling providing details in one resource and reference for the many lines of research currently underway today. Bioeconomics continues with in depth explorations of invasive species propagule pressure and dispersal models. Make no mistake; this is not an introductory work. I had to reconnect with distant memories of avoided classes featuring differential equations and statistics, but the mental exercise was worth it, and the authors give detailed explanations of each step towards their mathematical models.

In the middle of Bioeconomics of Invasive Species I found a classic, useful presentation about fuzzy definitions, semantic vagaries and linguistic and scientific uncertainty which are central to my presentations and to my work bringing diverse and opposing constituencies together. To say the least I am excited that the authors included an entire chapter about the role and implications of uncertainty in a world that wants science to rule “ex cathedra” and never ever recant a position. Further more, Bioeconomics of Invasive Species explains in both clear economic terminology why replacement cost valuation offers erroneous answers when used to account for invasive species costs. The authors offer a descriptive metaphor for why replacement costs do not give correct answers: “Metaphorically speaking, measuring economic value by multiplying visible price times quantity would be like measuring biological phenotype by using only visible molecules and structure coded by the genetic materials.” (Bioeconomics 2009 p. 156) Understanding the insider’s problem with existing statements of invasive species costs is laid out in clear prose complete with easy to follow graphics and charts. Policies surrounding invasive species will inevitably need to consider that replacement cost and market value as currently used can lead to both understatements and overstatements of the actual or true invasive species’ costs.

Chapter 9 brings all the differing strands together presenting a goal “…to design management and policy that accounts for invader population dynamics, control and eradication measure, cost benefit analysis, and methods for optimal decision making.” (Bioeconomics 2009 p. 180) A detailed elucidation of integrated decision making modeling is capped with the observation that “[s]trong human preferences for the present period coupled to a constant discount rate explain how reduced control of invasive species may emerge as a rational decision from a bioeconomic perspective.” The authors note the intergenerational challenge to economists and ecologists of valuing the complex needs of the environment going forward. “If we wish to preserve ecosystem for future generations through rational economic behavior, we must necessarily consider new economic incentives or revised methods for valuing ecosystems that cab be used to achieve this goal.” (Bioeconomics 2009 p. 201)

Daniel Simberloff writes that Bioeconomics of Invasive Species “…is a remarkable and profound synthesis [of] successes and failures in managing invasions [and] is a must-read for invasion biologists.” I would extend that to all those who are interested in or concerned about the impacts of invasive species and the considerations to be used in setting regulatory and response policies. This is a must-have reference tool for anyone actively working in invasive species fields and a guide to future research needs to help build better tools for decisions makers and ecosystem managers.

I hope to begin a series on this web log devoted to each of the chapters, and to produce a talk and presentation grounded in this important interface between ecology and economics.