Showing posts with label invasiveness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label invasiveness. Show all posts

Monday, February 27, 2012

The irony of protecting homes from invasion by planting invasive species


  image from: http://brookhaveninvasive.com/list-of-invasive-species/ 
                From the mother-country comes a remarkable example of the quicksand nature of invasive species issues. When two reasonable ideas intersect the domain of invasion biology and ecosystem services, we get a collision of desires arising from the wicked inconvenience of the complexities involved. Simply put, sometimes good ideas have unexpected outcomes. And most of the time, though not all of the time, the unexpected outcomes have a negative impact. Many times the unseen outcome arises because the initial idea or action takes place in the near term while the unintentional outcome shows up later. For example, planting running bamboo, Phyllostachys aurea Carrière ex A. Rivière & C. Rivière, golden bamboo, or Phyllostachys aureosulcata McClure, yellow grove bamboo, will enable fulfillment of short term expectations, and will, in the long run, surely destroy driveways, foundations, patios and neighborly love. 


               So the Metropolitan Police Force in the United Kingdom bravely set out to speak of things of which it knows little in the wrappings of that which it knows much. The Police force set out to offer landscaping solutions to personal security by presenting a list of 30 ornamental plants that will deter criminal intent. And from a pure security point of view they did a good job. The list is a mugger's hell of thorns and entrapment barriers and living barbed wire, and even some poisonous species for good measure.  "Most burglars are lazy. They look for easy ways of getting into a house or garden (and) by taking a few simple precautions you can reduce the risk of being burgled and make your house and garden more secure", the Tribune report notes.[1]  

                When it comes to the invasive species part of the article, there is silence on the issue of invasion biology which is ironic given the topic is defense of the home(land). Perhaps bamboo does not run in England, but for unwary Americans, and loyal Canadian subjects of the Queen, the list is a minefield of ecosystem challenges.  Many of the 30 species are indeed appropriate and useful as ornamental defense of hearth and home, but some are Trojan horses that should remind would be landscapers of Virgil's immortal line:  "Timeo Danaos et dona ferentis".
 
            First on the list is number 5  "Golden Bamboo - Phyllostachys aurea- Very graceful, forming thick clumps of up to 3.5m high. Less invasive than other bamboos. Hardy. Young shoots in spring." While it is very true that this extremely quick growing indestructible species will create a grove so dense nothing can move within or through it, it is also important to remember that this species also quickly moves across adjoining properties into parks and natural areas as well as the neighbors' manicure gardens. The American Bamboo Society provides a 4 + 4 step plan for removal cheerfully suggesting how easy this will be by assuming you are removing a small patch of say less than one acre. It should go without saying that buyers should beware for some bamboos can form dense, mono-cultural thickets that displace both native and ornamental species. Once bamboo is established, it is difficult and expensive to remove.

               Next up is number 11 - "Purple Berberis - Berberis thunbergii 'Atropurpurea'- Rich purple foliage. Thorny stem. Medium-sized deciduous. Any soil sunny position." Barberries are quickly establishing in eastern North American changing the ecosystems in which they establish themselves. Barberries are Nature's barbed wire and excellent defense against human and animal incursions but Japanese barberry does not stay put. Rather it is dispersed by wildlife and,  "...forms dense stands in natural habitats including canopy forests, open woodlands, wetlands, pastures, and meadows and alters soil pH, nitrogen levels, and biological activity in the soil. Once established, barberry displaces native plants and reduces wildlife habitat and forage. White-tailed deer apparently avoid browsing barberry, preferring to feed on native plants, giving barberry a competitive advantage. In New Jersey, Japanese barberry has been found to raise soil pH (i.e., make it more basic) and reduce the depth of the litter layer in forests."[2]

               Way down the list we find genus only recommendations such as Aralia with no species designation. Here the problem is one of imprecision for there are invasive Aralias such as Japanese Angelica Tree, Aralia elata (Miq.)Seem which can trap the uninformed gardener as well as the unsuspecting burglar.[3]  There is also mention of Mahonia some species of which may be showing signs of invasiveness in the US in certain circumstances. The unintentional irony is the ending statement, however: "Although they will take some time to grow, the end result justifies the effort. They should deter even the most determined burglar." Almost certainly selecting bamboo will disavow you of any thoughts of sluggish establishment and final solution through landscape domination. It is always worth remembering that when it comes to complex systems, simple solutions beget unexpected outcomes; there are no simple problems, no simple answers and no simple solutions.




[1] The 30 plants that can help protect your home against burglary. Telegraph Media Group Limited. February 27, 2012. [accessed February 27, 2012]   http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9108641/The-30-plants-that-can-help-protect-your-home-against-burglary.html

[2] Alien Plant Working Group. Berberis thunbergii Barberry family (Berberidaceae). Plant Conservation Alliance. July 7, 2009. [accessed February 27, 2012] http://www.nps.gov/plants/alien/fact/beth1.htm

[3] Central Jersey Invasive Species Strike Team (CJISST). Japanese Angelica Tree (Aralia elata). Invasive Plant Fact Sheet. [accessed February 27, 2012] http://www.fohvos.org/pdfs/factsheets/Aralia%20elata_Invasive%20Plants%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf

Sunday, February 26, 2012

Pithy Python Ponderings: Invasive Species are Wickedly Inconvenient


               Invasive species are a wicked inconvenience to those concerned and to those unaware. Invasion biology is the study of an ecological wicked problem.[1] The intentional or accidental release due to human activities and subsequent establishment of a new species into an ecosystem, in which the novel species has no co-evolutionary interactions, impacts the system irrevocably. Burmese pythons are a charismatic example of an ecosystem undergoing human induced change. The pythons are also an example of the complexities of the issue of invasive species and the wicked nature of any conversation. 
               
                In 2009 I wrote about the larger than life snake [Thompson. Pythons, People & Pathways: Invasive Species Slither In. Invasive Notes. August 22, 2012] and my up-close and personal controlled encounter with it. Now almost three years later, the saga continues inextricably towards a logical end.  In a recent study reported by Craig Pittman,  "... a lot of animals that used to be seen in the Everglades are gone — apparently  gobbled up by the invading snakes." [Pittman. When pythons take over Everglades, raccoons, rabbits and other small mammals vanish. Tampa Bay Times. January 31, 2012]  The study published by the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) and referred to by Pittman in some detail states in its discussion that "[n]umerous lines of evidence implicate introduced Burmese pythons as the primary cause of dramatic declines of several species of once-abundant mammals in ENP."[2]

               In the current misunderstanding of what science is and the confusion between fact, value and opinion, we feel obliged to present all points of views equally neatly confusing each component and producing an homogenized miasma of beliefs. Because science is about the repeated testing of hypothesis and not about absolute facts as received dogma, we are treated to a system that equates fairness with science. We feel obligated to closely inspect occasional hyper-opinions as fact. And so we get today's extra-ordinary journalistically bombastic headline: "Are pythons overrunning the Everglades? Some experts now say no."[3] On the face of it, the report simply notes that there are more opinions in the world than those in the reviewed study from the National Academy of Sciences. The problem is that in the PNAS paper we have a proposition that can be tested and either sustained or proved wrong, and in the two opinions from the Tribune article we have un-testable value statements which may or may not be testable. 

                  But as surely as tweets can fly and hogs have legs, we will hear that there is no consensus on any measurable impact of the establishment of a novel species in the Everglades.   This balance in the name of fairness results in logical fallacies of the 2 = 11 type. What is really called for if some feel the study is problematic is a testable model of their position with their methodology explained and their conclusions stated. To this we throw in the empirical  evidence debate that occupies dark corners of controversy. As my friend John  Waugh points out that " Most of us lack any empirical evidence that the light bulb goes off when the fridge is shut either."[4] We then use journalism to stir the pot of controversy until there is a virtual public sector boiling that serves to attract more and more uninformed opinion creating a congress of expectations.

               That non-indigenous pythons as a top predator or keystone species may be dramatically altering an ecosystem should come as no surprise. According to a Science Codex article   "it is predator/prey relationships (not competitor or mutualistic relationships) that provide the necessary stability for almost infinite numbers of species to exist in ecosystems. They do so by keeping the size of species populations in check at supportable levels. ..When prey are high, predators increase and reduce the number of prey by predation. When predators are low, prey decrease and thus reduce the number of predators by starvation. These predator/prey relationships thereby promote stability in ecosystems and enable them to maintain large numbers of species."[5] This strongly supports the study and of course is never mentioned when competing opinions are submitted for consideration as science construed in terms of journalism.

               Because invasive species issues are a form of a wicked problem we tend to skip the science when a testable conclusion does not fit our value system or our a priori desired outcomes. Because the issues of invasion biology and ecology are so complex, by the time we absolutely know we have a problem, we no longer have the resources to actually do anything about the resulting alteration of the ecosystem itself. When I was involved directly in the nursery industry and managed fields and green houses, I did not need to be overwhelmed by a new weed or insect in my production to react, and if my very small managed system began to yield unexpected results, I would identify the usual suspects of physical change as well as take immediate steps to eradicate or control the new species without waiting for the complete loss of the crops. So while it is true that our ecosystems are complex adaptive systems with many internal signals that create the great and small cycles, they are because of their very chaotic nature extremely sensitive to small novel perturbations which can quickly change the character of the system. If farmers awoke every morning and decided to wait and see what novelty might do to their harvests we would all starve.

               There is a tendency to overreact in the other direction and misunderstand the nature of science based papers and the information therein. Invasive species problems rarely if ever have a linear solution. Once the cat is out of the bag it can almost never be stuffed back in having at the very least scratched a hole in the bag in the re-stuffing attempt and therefore altering the bag (the system) forever.  Driving a solution that depends upon human activity disappearing in a world of 7 billion souls achieves little in the long run. And most importantly invasive species are considered from a human-centered point of view mostly because the people writing about and living in the ecosystems are human. One can perhaps wish there were no humanity, but the exercise is an adventure into the null space of human reality. We are here and we are part of nature; and for now we must find ways to live in nature and with it. The Dorcas et al. paper is a form of early warning, and may actually come too late to affect any significant reversal of the process of integration of a novel species into south Florida. We may actually be in the control and management phase adjusting our expectations of local ecosystems services that we can recover from the resources that are being altered.

               Buried way down in the philosophical basement of all invasive species debates is the concept of ecological systems and the services the resources provide. In the cellar of ideas where few bother to tread, are value systems that state that ecosystem services are infinite, that ecosystem resources can be owned and dispensed on a who can pay basis, and that ecosystem services are separate from human activities, needs and wants. It is here that the idea that the Everglades is a vast other just waiting to be processed by human industry and intellect resides; and implicit in this is the idea that nothing is sacred, that everything exists to be subservient to the desires of humankind today. If there is nothing of value that we think we need in the Everglades with pythons then it is clear that diverting scarce resources to their control is problematic . Because banks do not put a value on the spirit of place, of what concern are a few less rodents and mammals to us? In other words why worry about the introduction of a new species to an old ecosystem when change is all around us.  


              



[1] Thompson. 2011. The Wicked Inconvenience of Invasive Species: A Reader in Complexities. InvasiveNotes. http://ipetrus.blogspot.com/2011/06/wicked-inconvenience-of-invasive.html
The discussion of invasive species issues may be framed by the planning theory of “wicked” problems. Rittel & Webber's formulation of wicked problems specifies ten characteristics, perhaps best considered in the context of social policy planning, 1- 10. Jeff Conklin Ph.D., a computer scientist expanded, or rather refined the definition, with 11-14, below.

1. There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem.

2. Wicked problems have no stopping rule.

3. Solutions to wicked problems are not true-or-false, but instead better, worse, or good enough.

4. There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem.

5. Every solution to a wicked problem is a "one-shot operation"; because there is no opportunity to learn by trial-and-error, every attempt counts significantly.

6. Wicked problems do not have an enumerable (or an exhaustively describable) set of potential solutions, nor is there a well-described set of permissible operations that may be incorporated into the plan.

7. Every wicked problem is essentially unique.

8. Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another problem.

9. The existence of a discrepancy representing a wicked problem can be explained in numerous ways. The choice of explanation determines the nature of the problem's resolution.

10. The planner has no right to be wrong (Planners are liable for the consequences of the actions they generate). Further, the planner or designer (solving the problem) has no inherent right to solve the problem, and no permission to make mistakes.

11. The problem is not understood until after formulation of a solution.
Stakeholders have radically different world views and different frames for understanding the problem

12. Constraints and resources to solve the problem change over time.

13. The problem is never solved.

14. Wicked problems are often "solved" (as well as they can be...) through group efforts.

15. Wicked problems require inventive/creative solutions.

16. Every implemented solution to a wicked problem has consequences, and may cause additional problems.

[2] Dorcas et al. 2012. Severe mammal declines coincide with proliferation of
invasive Burmese pythons in Everglades National Park. PNAS. accessed February 26, 2012] http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/01/23/1115226109.full.pdf
Received for review in September of 2011, the paper has eleven authors. Given the point I shall try to make today, I think it important to list them by name and their institutions of record:  Michael E. Dorcas, Department of Biology, Davidson College, Davidson, NC 28035; John D. Willson, Department of Fish and Wildlife Conservation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061; Robert N. Reed, Fort Collins Science Center, US Geological Survey, Fort Collins, CO 80526; Ray W. Snow, Everglades National Park, National Park Service, Homestead, FL 33034; Michael R. Rochford, Fort Lauderdale Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Davie, FL 33314; Melissa A. Miller, Department of Biological Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849; Walter E. Meshaka, Jr., State Museum of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg, PA 17120; Paul T. Andreadis, Department of Biology, Denison University, Granville, OH 43023; Frank J. Mazzotti , Fort Lauderdale Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Davie, FL 33314; Christina M. Romagos, Department of Biology, Davidson College, Davidson, NC 28035; and Kristen M. Hart. Southeast Ecological Science Center, US Geological Survey, Davie, FL 33314. The study was edited by Peter M. Vitousek, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, and approved December 21, 2011.

[3] Barbara Liston. Are pythons overrunning the Everglades? Some experts now say no. Chicago Tribune. February 24, 2012. [accessed February 26, 2012] http://www.chicagotribune.com/sns-rt-usa-pythonsevergladesl2e8do4ou-20120224,0,5920161.story?page=1
"Do I think we have an impending disaster? I don't think so," said Scott Hardin, exotic species coordinator for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
"That study should have never made it to the light of day,"

[4] personal communication email February 26, 2012

[5] Solved! Mystery that stumped ecosystem modelers. ScienceCodex {Source: National Science Foundation} February 22, 2012. [accessed February 26, 2012] http://www.sciencecodex.com/solved_mystery_that_stumped_ecosystem_modelers-86605

Saturday, November 26, 2011

What is an Invasive Species?



What is an "invasive species"?

               An answer will depend whom you ask, and to a large extend what outcomes the person asked expects.

That was not a very helpful answer. Could you give a few answers that show different definitions of an "invasive species"?

               Sure.  First let's look at some words that are used to describe a change in species distribution that upset existing ecosystem balances and cause changes in ecosystem services that lead or may lead to system resource change or collapse:  adventive, alien, casual, colonizing, cryptogenic, escaped, endemic, established, exotic, foreign, immigrant, imported, introduced, invasive, native, naturalized, nonindigenous, noxious, nuisance, pest, spreading, temporary, tramp, transferred, transformer, transient, translocated, transplanted, transported, travelling, waif, and weedy. (Colautti & MacIsaac, 2004) Brendan Larson's thirteen meta categories to consider when we try to come to grips with a definition are: invaders, terrorists, piggy-backers, opportunists, spawn, mirrors of ourselves, providers, hybrids, tricksters, matrix elements and dynamic matrices, transients, founts of life and creation, teachers and instructors that force us to think about our assumptions. (Larson, 2007)   

Yes that is all very nice, but I want a simply straightforward definition.   

               Well, because of the complexities that arise from the ecosystems themselves and the many stakeholders and interested parties, there are many definitions. This happens because it is easier to start with an outcomes and work backwards to a definition. In other words we color the definition with preconceived ideas and concepts. This even our choice of words predisposes us to a view of the problem even before we have a definition. The very choice of the word invasive presumes a pejorative meaning, because natural system stakeholders so the negative impact of what to them looked like invasions.

Yeah Yeah Yeah, but I am just passing through and I do not have a lot of time for this, just give me a definition.

               The International Union for Conservation of Nature, (IUCN) describes invasive species as “animals, plants or other organisms introduced by man into places out of their natural range of distribution, where they become established and disperse, generating a negative impact on the local ecosystem and species.” Invasive species can negatively impact human health, the economy (i.e. tourism, agriculture), and native ecosystems. These impacts may disrupt the ecosystem processes, introduce diseases to humans or flora and fauna, and reduce biodiversity.
               Invasive Species Definition Clarification and Guidance White Paper Submitted by the definitions Subcommittee of the Invasive Species Advisory Committee (ISAC) in 2006 sought to make clear the US Executive Order 13112  which defines an invasive species as “an alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health.” In the Executive Summary of the National Invasive Species Management Plan (NISMP) the term invasive species is further clarified and defined as “a species that is non-native to the ecosystem under consideration and whose introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health.”   (Beck, et al., ISAC 2006)
               In California an invasive plant is defined by Cal-IPC as  invasive non-native plant species that threaten wildlands and are are not native to, yet can spread into, wildland ecosystems, and that also displace native species, hybridize with native species, alter biological communities, or alter ecosystem processes.   This definition does not address diseases, insects or animals, just plants and only if they invade California wildlands with native habitat values. The invasive plant definition does not include plant species found solely in areas of human-caused disturbance such as roadsides and cultivated agricultural fields.  For these human disturbance areas the terminology or word would be weed. The California Native Plant Society has a straight forward definition of an invasive exotic plant, to wit: "a plant which is able to proliferate and aggressively alter or displace indigenous biological communities."
               The European Commission on the Environment states that "Invasive Alien Species are animals and plants that are introduced accidently or deliberately into a natural environment where they are not normally found. They represent a serious threat to native plants and animals in Europe, causing € millions worth of damage every year."

Great now I need to understand what a native species is? I don't suppose there is a simple definition. is there?

               That would be a different blog posting. Definitions of native run into the same fuzzy definition problem  that we are skirting in this blog. The closer you look the harder it is to pin down exactly what the term means. What exactly is native at 650 ppm CO2 for example is a question no one is talking about. Suppose we move an endangered species to a new site; is it native now?

This invasive business requires too much thinking. Can't you make this simpler?

               Sure: an invasive species is the wrong pathogen, plant, animal in the wrong place at the wrong time.


Works Cited

Beck, K. G., Zimmerman, K., Schardt, J. D., Stone, J., Lukens, R. R., Reichard, S., et al. (ISAC 2006). Invasive Species Definition Clarification and Guidance White Paper. Retrieved March 2009, from http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/docs/council/isacdef.pdf
Colautti, R. I., & MacIsaac, H. J. (2004). A neutral terminology to define ‘invasive’. Diversity Distrib. , 10, 135-141.
Larson, B. M. (2007). Thirteen ways of looking at invasive species. In D. R. Clements, & S. J. Darbyshire (Eds.), Invasive plants: Inventories, strategies and action. Topics in Canadian Weeds Science (Vol. 5). Canadian Weed Science Society – Société canadienne de.



Thursday, March 10, 2011

Ruminations on the Complexities of Invasive Species

The blog posting, Biologists as engineers of the living world, offers an opportunity to expand on my theme of the wicked inconvenience of invasive species.[1] Should we engage in biological engineering to solve invasive species problems? Invasive species are a wicked problem, a type of problem that is found in many social and physical systems. A very well know wicked problem intrinsically related to invasive species is climate change. In two sentences I have described two complex systems that are regularly reduced or simplified into complicated explanations with associated multiple conflicting solutions. In a complicated system, on the other hand, the members or parts and their interactions or connections are equally important. Unless redundancy is built in, when one part or connection fails, the entire system fails. In a complex system on the other hand the members or parts are of no individual importance, and a loss of one is not critical. However, the connections are important and it is the loss of a connection or interactive pathways that can dramatically alter the whole system. In a complicated system simple rules give simple predictive results whereas in a complex system, simple rules result in unpredictable outcomes. 

Invasive species are, in some sense, a symptom of a perturbation in or a disturbance of ecosystems. Ecosystems are dynamic networks of interactions and relationships that are most assuredly not collections of static, predictable entities. One does not predetermine the exact flight path of a bee or the precise flow of a stream but rather one describes the most probable direction and boundaries in which the system may be found in the future. More specifically it is possible estimate the probability of certain outcomes weighing one against another but it is not possible to say for certain which outcome is certain in all cases for all time.
Ecosystems are also adaptive which means that their individual and collective activities, actions and behavior change as a result of inputs, interactions and behaviors. Invasive species are the result of some action or sequence of actions that result in the movement of one species into a new region. By definition, invasive species are the harmful-to-humanity, non-indigenous pathogens, plants or animals that are introduced as a result of human activity into a novel ecological system – into our backyards and homes. It is worth noting that as a rule it takes more than one introduction event, so the establishment of an invasive species through human activity enhances the portability of success. The complexity lies in part within the many assumptions that I just made in trying to define what the problem is, and I have not yet discussed cascading effects of species introduction on ecosystem services.
To engineer a solution, we start with an identification of a need or problem, and then work to develop a tool or process that becomes the solution. We try to economize costs, which usually but not always means some linear answer more or less in a straight line preferably with as few gaps as possible. A prosaic example is a plow. The need is to break up the soil and the ecosystem so that a food source can be easily planted. The engineered solution today is a metal shape that cuts or rips through the land in a straight line. The plow works wonders if you keep your eye on the goal which is to make planting easy and short term yields. At the same time the engineered solution creates unintended new problems such as erosion and soil nutrient run off. This is the fear inherent in the linear approach to biology.
The interesting side product of the engineering marvel we know as the plow is the ability to disturb the earth inexpensively, repeatedly and, therefore, chronically produce a disturbance pattern that favors certain species over others. And these species are either called weeds by farmers and gardeners or invasive plants by natural area managers and ecologists. This unintended product is possible anytime one applies linear thinking to non linear systems and is even in an ironic twist guaranteed by definition. The unexpected outcomes from engineering in a straight line should not be a reason not to consider engineering complex systems. Rather it is an invitation to think first and consider using applied complex system theory as an integral part of the engineering process. 
Historically, when faced by a problem in landscaping we engineer a simple, cost effective solution. Since landscaping usually includes plants, the landscape architect will engineer a plant solution if he or she can. The discipline of horticulture admits to the need from time to time of other expert professionals, but the ultimate design engineering rests with the landscape architect. The odds are slight that the client will pay for a comprehensive team of equals including hydrologists, ecologists, biologists, entomologist, and a dozen other specialties in advance of identifying a particular problem. In other words, we do not set out to identify potential problems that may affect the common ecosystem, but restrict of future externalities, our deliberations are directed to the landscape at hand to keep costs from quickly becoming prohibitive. And so we specify English ivy, Hedera helix, as a general purpose groundcover to minimize planting costs as well as maintenance cost in the near future. 
Linear engineered solutions are not solely found in ornamental gardening. In order to meet the insatiable demand for goods, the wooden shipping pallet is a simple engineered platform. Take a tree from the fields near where a product is made, create a pallet, and send the product on the pallet to a new ecosystem. Hidden on board on or in the pallet may be living hitchhikers foreign and deadly to the receiving ecosystem. This is straightforward, simple and deadly to ahs trees. The emerald ash borer is eating the ash trees of North America. The borer most likely arrived on wooden pallets or shipping craters which, had an interdisciplinary team been assembled might have been avoided. And with identification of a risk, protocols could have been put in place to reduce the risk of millions of acres of dead trees.
Biological systems may perhaps be engineered if we keep a few key things in mind. First complicated linear and determined systems produce controllable and predictable outcomes, while complex adaptive systems can produce novel, creative, and emergent outcomes.[2] Biological systems are complex systems of the latter type, and will require a sympathetic engineering strategy that changes some aspect of the system and then works with the biologic system while it adjusts to the change. The traditional assumption of straight-line thinking will be dangerous if applied to complex biologic systems. The dependable ascertain that every observed effect has an observable cause will lead inevitably to unintended consequences. A belief that the whole can be understood by taking the system apart and studying the pieces will tend to produce surprises many of which could be unpleasant. The problem of complex systems, the challenge of biology is that they are rooted in chaos theory and wickedly defy any predictive detail modeling.
We should not be afraid of engineering. We should be afraid, however, of treating biologic systems like cars. We can tool a solution to a door lock with every reasonable expectation of a predictable outcome; we cannot tool biologic systems in the same way and expect to predict the result. On the other hand, this is not a reason, to adapt engineering to a process of nudging complex systems, pushing their constraints, and observing the results in an endless dance with our universe.




[1] Link to multiple posting on the wicked inconvenience theme of invasive species: http://ipetrus.blogspot.com/search?q=wicked+inconvenience
[2] Jones, Wendell. "Complex Adaptive Systems." Beyond Intractability. Ed. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Ocotber 2003. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, USA.

Sunday, January 02, 2011

Invasive species are all around us


    Invasive species are all around us; they are ubiquitous. Invasive species as defined by Executive Order 13112 as a species "… that is non-native to the ecosystem under consideration and whose introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health." Invasive species do not just happen, however; they are helped by human activities. Among these activities are human developmental disturbances, the chronic 'plowing' of natural areas, and the now global nature of the market place. The regular year after year pressures of human activity on the balance of existing ecological systems undermines the resiliency of the ecosystems and ultimately earth's biome. This is understandable as we extract resources from natural systems in order to develop our anthropic ecosystems to support human well-being. Moreover the pathways that our goods travel provide platforms for other species to hitch a ride from ecosystem to ecosystem throughout the world and across the planet.

    An invasive species needs several things to happen in order for it to become established within a new ecological system. Among these is a pathway or a mechanism by which it can be transported from one ecosystem to another. And it needs this platform or vector to provide the pathway over time, that is more than once, so that multiple introductions can take place. For the most part, one introduction does not create an invasion event, though the gypsy moth introduction serves as a reminder that it is possible to do great harm through one well-meaning action. The very act of multiple introductions is a disturbance regime in the ecosystem that begins to alter the impacted ecological system. In addition the multiple introductions make it possible to overcome random events that might prevent its establishment.

    The above mentioned random events are part of the resiliency of a complex system. An introduced seed may land on a rock and not germinate or in water where it drowns. An insect may be devoured by a bird or run into a windshield before it can lay its eggs or find a mate in order to reproduce. The initial invader may be stepped on or washed away before it can set down roots or start a family. And if it is the lone invader, it may never find that all important significant other. Multiple introductions of novel species increase the odds that two ecosystem immigrants may find each other and begin  the process of establishment and eventual naturalization.

    Examples of multiple introductions of plant species are easy to find and include kudzu, (Pueraria montana var. lobata), buffelgrass (Pennisetum ciliare), silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix), callery pears (Pyrus calleryana). Harder to demonstrate but almost certainly the result of many introductions over time are insects such as the emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis) or the brown marmorated stink bug, (Halyomorpha halys). The Asian lady bug (Harmonia axyridis) was repeatedly introduced as a biological control agent. Kudzu was intentionally planted for erosion control and as a forage crop in great numbers in the 1930s while the silver carp was stocked for recreational fishing. It is important to notice that not every invasive species was intentionally introduced. Many if not most were the result of accidental introduction or simply unnoticed hitchhiking.

    For those who value the gardens, which they call natural areas, the constant influx of disease, insects, weeds and destructive animals from different ecosystems, leave no choice but to weed out the undesirable everyday, and to restrict the importation or movement of non indigenous possibly harmful species that may reduce or alter the 'garden' (natural area). This is what a farmer does everyday. He does not say that is alright to do nothing about the invasion of his 'garden" or fields. Rather he fences out the unwanted, weeds out the harmful plants, and fights the insects and diseases each and every day. The farmer may ask the government to protect the lands and his work from invasion from illegal alien species that have been shown to reduce his harvests. The farmer, moreover, is not alone. The ornamental landscape gardener does the same thing. Both decide which species should stay and which should not be allowed. The natural area manager does the same triage simply dealing with a larger palette of species and a corresponding greater complexity of interactions and relationships.

    Invasive species have travelled with mankind ever since it first it settled down to a life style based upon farming. And in farming humanity undertook to plow the land and to tame nature which is to say to disturb the landscape annually. In doing so, mankind's actions favored certain species that were predisposed to find advantage in the constant disturbance of the environment. As agriculture allowed for the establishment of cities and dense populations of people, so it allowed for companion species to coevolve with the farm based cultures of man. And as man spread across the globe so these companion species came with him. The historic companions we call pests and weeds; the new companion species that are taking advantage of human disturbance and trade are called invasive species.

Saturday, January 01, 2011

Invasive Species are eating your lunch; and changing your world


    Invasive species are changing your world. They are changing the landscapes right in front of your eyes, and they are literally eating your lunch. They are replacing species that you once took for granted like chestnut and elm and now ash trees, as well as changing the very texture of plants that support your world perhaps even your quality of life. And though they are doing this rather quickly, you are mostly oblivious because you can no longer read the landscape. If the grass is green and there are trees then all is well as you rush from crisis to crisis. You have become landscape illiterate because your immediate needs do not seem to correlate with the complex interactions and relationships among microbes, plants, insets, reptiles and animals and you.

    Some invasive species are so personal you do, however, take notice and great amounts of time and energy, using early detection and rapid response strategies (EDRR) to keep pathogens, diseases and parasites out of that complex biological system known to you as your body. In this you are clear: that the ideal is to prevent the disease in the first place. And to this end you create quarantines, inspections and protocols that can stop commerce in its tracks. You are very careful not to let other people's uncontrolled adventures to exotic lands and places potentially impact your biological system. You are very willing to make a second party who provides a pathway for a disease pay the cost of prevention if possible. You hold the government accountable to the personal common good and expect it to inspect and detain travelers and merchandize that risk analysis have identified as probable vectors of human illness. Yellow fever, cholera, malaria, typhoid and influenza are in an analogous sense invasive species that once introduced into your biological system are able to wreak havoc.

    We are more focused when business interests might be impacted by alien exotic agents of lower profits. Agriculture is very concerned about invasive disease, plants and animals that reduce harvests and yields, and therefore, make production costs higher than sales potential. In other words, pests like Russian wheat aphids or the European corn borer reduce the amount of grain produced per field acre, and drive up the costs of doing business and eventually the cost of food. Agriculture has recognized in the United States the idea of preemption as an effective approach to reducing invasive species impacts on production and therefore costs and profits since at least 1726 and the banning of barberry in Connecticut. There are even laws and regulation in place to protect ornamental landscapes and its nursery industry promulgated by USDA APHIS in partnership with the individual states (National Plant Board).

    When it comes to your natural areas that preserve complex and diverse systems of life with as little human impact as possible, the rules change dramatically and the problems multiply as you externalize your life on to the dumping grounds of nature. A small group of advocates struggles to create a national policy with little to success. There is a national executive council (NISC) with an advisory committee (ISAC) but there is no funding; it can meet, network and advise, but it cannot make anything actually happen. Members and staff mostly talk to each other and to those very few who see the loss in the changes brought by invasive species. The landscape illiteracy translates in to an ignorance of the dynamics of ecological systems; systems to which you are an integral part. That green expanse in the parks of the mid-Atlantic is not a harmless flow of native grasses inviting to interacting with the ebb and flow of natural processes, but rather a non indigenous species which in my unsubstantiated lay opinion may have been introduced in utility rights-of-way seed mitigation mixes, is wavyleaf basket grass, Oplismenus hirtellus ssp. undulatifolius. This grass is spreading, as shown on EDDMapS, like a wild fire changing the fundamental make-up and processes of the last historic native species aggregations of the mid-Atlantic. As it crowds out native plants and the glorious wild flowers that provide sustenance to native insects, it is reducing the complexity of the food web and reducing the resiliency of these last great places of natural beauty and doing so without you seeing anything amiss. Desperate pleas from experts seeking funding in these economic times go unheeded; even in the heyday of uncontrolled spending bothering to spend money on the early eradication of a non native invader was never fully supported by you. You preferred to wait until the invader clearly and irrevocably damaged your personal space before you were willing to push your government to action.

    A dead ash tree falling onto your house (Emerald ash borer epidemic threatens Ohio trees) because of a borer from Asia which you chose to ignore has caught your attention even as the lack of funding went mostly unnoticed, until millions of acres of ash trees began to die. Now it is a rear guard action trying to hold the line. Historically the gypsy moth showed us this scenario over 100 years ago (The Great Gypsy Moth War: The History of the First Campaign in Massachusetts to Eradicate the Gypsy Moth, 1890–1901), when you decided to un-fund early attempts at control only to watch your woodlands become defoliated by the introduced exotic pest. You have clearly said through your silence that you prefer to throw your unwanted pets out onto the street creating a feral cat assault on song birds and you waited until the 15 foot snakes from Burma entered your bedrooms before you said there might be something wrong.

    You should have a national policy discussion; you need a plan and a fund much like the one you already have for wildfires that can be applied to early detection of invasive species and most importantly money for their rapid eradication at the time of detection when the costs are very small. You need to say that your natural areas are worth saving per se; that your management of these native enclaves will include the removal of certain species, and the preemption of their introduction into these United States.

    I continue to propose the creation of an all taxa grassroots funded effort to advocate and educate members of Congress as to the impacts of invasive species.


Picture of dead trees from Natural Resources Canada

Picture of wavyleaf basket grass from forestry images.org

Sunday, July 25, 2010

Invasive species confusion confounds

Invasive species are everywhere. One man’s invasive species, feral animal, or weed is another one’s native plant, garden favorite or cherished pet. And even more troublesome are aggressive wandering opportunistic species that come with multiple uses for mankind. Kudzu, Pueraria montana (Lour.) Merr. var. lobata (Willd.) Maesen & S. Almeida, loose-strife, Lythrum salicaria L. and burdock, Arctium minus Bernh. were brought to North America for their medicinal, aesthetic and culinary uses. Kudzu, the invasive species, can provide a biofuel source, fiber for textiles, food through its starch content, forage and feed for cattle and other farm animals, pharmaceutical potential, arts and crafts, and a fragrant flower on a vine that could cover unsightly disturbances in landscape settings.  Purple loose-strife, an invasive species, has given the ornamental gardener a beautiful flower and garden workhorse that blooms through out the growing season oblivious to the damage of insects and diseases, withstanding a wide range of temperatures, and growing through flood and drought. Lesser burdock is also a medicinal and food source but interestingly enough gets classified as a weed rather than an invasive species.


The weed or invasive species question is a reflection of one’s point of view. If you are standing in a managed landscape, a garden or a farm, then a species that invades and reduce your harvest or your view, is a weed, and invader a pest to be removed. If you are standing in a natural area, park or wilderness than a species that comes in from other ecosystems, and is not native, is an invasive species that needs to be weeded, culled and removed. In both cases the best strategy is to detect the plant early and remove it at once. This is called is an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategy in managed landscapes and is called Early Detection and Rapid Response (EDRR) in natural landscapes. And while we are speaking about plants, the idea of perspective extends to animals. For example I have written about the third rail of invasive species issues, the feral cat (Are cats an invasive species - a wickedly inconvenient conversation), and I have also noted that the problem of invasive species context extends to insects too.

Invasive species are those that are transported by human activity easily and readily establish in new ecosystems. Taking advantage of our global trade they hitchhike on our human provided pathways. In this way they have spread with humanity across the earth. Mankind is perpetually disturbing or “plowing” the land. This chronic disturbance favors certain companion species that “travel” with us. Some of the species come with our knowledge and some come unbidden; the ability to survive and reproduce within a large range of conditions allow these invasive species to take advantage of and work with mankind’s grand disruption of local native or natural ecosystems.

It is easy to chastise ornamental gardeners for introducing new species of colorful plants that may escape or to rail against pet owners that discard over grown species into supposed natural recycling systems (Invasive issues and complicated species) The cost of mitigating the impact of invasive species has been calculated to be around 132 billion dollars) plants, animals, disease); the size of the nursery industry is approximately 140 billion dollars setting up a perfect storm of competing interests. However, things get more complicated when basic human need such as food or fuel is involved. We quickly forget that the major impetus behind kudzu and its spread was the search for a legume that could survive in the US southeast. The collision of desires that surround our pets and our interests, wants and needs clouds the issues of invasive species. Do we save the charismatic non indigenous swan (Wicked Invasive Swans) or save the native flora long the water’s edge? Considering the problems of invasive species is to take a look at our human activities and our place in the world. How will we resolve the conflict between our immediate needs versus our long term wants?

Saturday, March 06, 2010

Invasive species - rambling thoughts

Discussion today about invasive species are couched in reports, papers and research that stretch all the way back to the 1980s with roots reaching even to the late 1950s. Conflated with all the complexities inherent in invasive species is the idea that invasive species are somehow a new public policy issue. When combined with the inverse issue of endangered (native) species the perfect storm of suspended disbelief comes into focus as today’s ecologists find themselves continuously thwarted in every policy effort at the level of the disinterested, unengaged, fully uninformed voter. Amazingly no matter how dire the issue, how carefully the disaster and damage are described, the public is unmotivated and unconcerned, and unwilling to spend the funds to combat and mitigate the problem.

Buried deeply in the American psyche and to some extend Western Culture is the problem of nature. Defining nature, natural, naturalized, native, artifice and artificial, as well as art and international and cosmopolitan rises above the domain of science. Knowing the hardships of the European attempts to establish communities in North America such as the Norse colony of Vinland is crucial to understanding invasive species issues today. In current discussions there unspoken ideas surface that European settlement was a foregone condition and that nature therefore is something that was “losing” the contest from the beginning. This view however is hindsight of John Muir, expounded upon by Aldo Leopold and codified by Charles Elton, amplified by the modern students of ecology. Unremarked is the fact that at least until 1800 there was every reason to believe that the great experiment would fail; the experiment of surviving on this unrelenting, wild continent.

John Muir saw that technology was ‘winning’ the battle, and that at the present rate the last great “untouched” places could be gone if a new value system could not be created to delimited special places. Aldo Leopold refined what it could meant by the idea of a landscape and more importantly to create and manage one, and Elton among many achievements grabbed the idea of invasive species harm so that a new generation could begin to understand the critical importance of finding a away to control the aexotic, alien, newlydefined 'unnatural' invasions. In doing so the three seers of the ecological preservation movement led a revolution describing a new value system that taught a new generation how to see and understand the world. And this new world view seemed to its followers to overturn the basics of gardening and farming. The old ways must be at best uniformed and at worse lacking in scientific rigor.

However the early colonists were not scientific ignoramuses, and in fact were rather more well philosophically grounded, understanding that science was a tool to help with value system management. They were not part of the Age of Enlightenment for nothing; for concurrent with the efforts to survive in the wilderness went the debates as to what constituted a native, and under what conditions a non native could become naturalized, if ever. Participants in the community discussion included prominent Americans such as Jefferson and European thinkers such as Raynal as well other European and American natural philosophers who happened to be practitioners of the science of horticulture and therefore accomplished gardeners. In addition the conversations of native and naturalized were wrapped around the concept of resource appropriation and use as well as reconstitution, revitalization or as we now call the concepts and dynamics of sustainability. The first Europeans thought the idea of species included humans and therefore applied the labels native and naturalized both to themselves and to their surroundings. For them it was self-evident that if a person could become naturalized then so could a plant or animal. Early European settlers and thinkers did not see mankind as apart from nature but solidly in the middle of nature as a participant.

Sunday, January 24, 2010

Climate Change & Invasive Species - a Dynamic Relationship

We recognize the Administration’s commitment to dealing proactively with global climate change and we particularly applaud the Department of Interior’s establishment of a Climate Change Response Council to synthesize data and coordinate appropriate management of our nation’s lands and waters. We also acknowledge the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) recent, detailed presentation of the impact of climate change in its publication: “Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture, Land Resources, Water Resources, and Biodiversity in the United States.”[1] Yet, in spite of these notable efforts, the issue of climate change and invasive species biology remains both unreported and underappreciated.

ISSUE
Climate change and biological invasion are dynamic interconnected and interdependent phenomena that affect human health and well being through their impact on ecosystem resources, goods and services. This includes dynamic physical and biological processes such as weather and species movement, climate and species adaptation. Ecosystems as well as climate systems maintain their structures and functions by a multiplicity of dynamic equilibriums that are rigorously controlled by interdependent regulating mechanisms. Ecosystems provide services and resources such as agriculture and food security, water supplies, natural resources, wildlife, recreation, and public health and safety nationwide. Without a greater emphasis on scientific research, the issues involving climate and invasive species issues will remain murky and problematic to policy makers and individual stakeholders alike.[2]

Climate is defined as the long-term weather pattern of an area, including temperature, precipitation, and wind.[3] The speed at which physical properties of climate systems change affects the biological functions of an ecosystem’s member species. A change in climate impacts the domain and range of an ecosystem’s function altering the present expected service dynamics and resource outputs. The change in climate patterns and the speed of these changes directly influence biological systems including the ability of invasive species to become established and thrive when introduced into new ecosystem. In turn, the speed of ecosystem change, both physically and biologically, can be dramatically increased by the introduction of invasive species.[4] The interconnectivity and interdependent relationships of climate, ecosystems and invasive species result in complexities that resist simplified absolute solutions. Because ecosystems are defined in part by climate type and the species that inhabit them, invasive species establishment as well as climate change, alters ecosystem type. Consequently, the expected services and resources of a given ecosystem are altered. At a minimum this means a potential dramatic reshuffling of agricultural services and resources such as food, fuel, feed, fiber, flower and forests along with quickly changing land use decision pressures.

The interrelationship between climatic change, the biology of invasive species, and ecosystem resources and utilization by human systems necessitates that all levels of government integrate invasive species considerations into climate change policies. Of critical consideration is the development of practices that strengthen environmental monitoring, management and control of invasive species as a means to minimize impacts on ecosystem resources in response to changing conditions. The physical processes of climate interact with the biological processes of Earth’s ecosystems and in turn are intertwined with the socio-economics of human activities. It is important to understand that climates can exist without biological systems, but useful biological systems are defined by climate; consequently, ecosystem resources and services to humanity are dependent on and supported by a specific narrow range of climate types. [5]

ACTION
Decisive action is required. This briefing paper, prepared for 2010 National Invasive Species Awareness Week (NISAW), provides:

a) Background information on the linkages between invasive species and climate change, and;
b) Recommendations for action by the Federal government to capitalize on the opportunities to integrate invasive species mitigation in climate change policy and reduce the risks of invasive species to the economy, environment, and human health.


BACKGROUND
Natural resource managers are beginning to plan for adaptation to changing climate. Federal, state, and local agencies, tribes, NGOs, and private landowners all play essential roles in addressing invasive species/ecosystem issues. Collaborative programs that link universities, agricultural producers, the fishing and seafood industry, conservation organizations, recreational interests, trade and transportation interests, government agencies, and policymakers are necessary to effectively address the issues. The USDA reports that “… observation and monitoring systems must be able to support analyses that can aid this management challenge, i.e., adapting to change, documenting the rapidity of ecological changes to assist in adjustment of existing management strate­gies and, most importantly, forecasting when poten­tial thresholds of change might occur and assessing how rapidly changes will occur. Ecological fore­casting is one of the specific goals of international programs such as Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS), but exactly how such programs will fulfill these goals is still in development.”[6]

Changes in climate systems impact all scales and levels of biological organization from single organism to community level ecosystems. Changes in climate affect both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. In a report on the impact of climate change on marine fisheries and aquaculture, Barange and Perry remind us that the “…combination of these proximate impacts results in emergent ecological responses, which include alterations in species distributions, biodiversity, productivity and micro-evolutionary processes (Harley et al., 2006).”[7] The implication of these changes in climate is a movement of species out of their near term expected ecosystems into a migration of warm species northwards and a corresponding loss of species in colder ecosystems. These modeling assumptions about species migration are filled with uncertainty in need of funding for research. Uncertainty is found in current distribution information and data affecting the inferred species’ habitat preferences and distribution shifts; in unavailable accurate estimates of population and dispersal parameters, changes in aquatic or terrestrial chemistry; in synergistic effects between species or anthropogenic factors; and species’ genotypic or phenotypic adaptations.[8] Climate system change dynamics on marine ecosystems, for example, using bioclimate envelopes could “…model changes in species’ distributions and abundance patterns as a result of climate change. The increasing experimentation in culture operations for a wide variety of marine and freshwater vertebrate and invertebrate species should provide opportunities to learn more about their responses to environmental conditions and which conditions lead to optimal (and suboptimal) growth.”[9]

Integral to any policy or practice is the ability to acquire integrated physical, biological and economic data on climate and invasive species relationships over multiple scales of time and space in order to improve forecast models and resource management response to environmental change. Efforts to monitor and provide data sets such as the Invasive Plant Atlas of New England’s (IPANE) and the Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health’s EDDMapS are examples of invaluable non governmental resources in need of ongoing funding sources. Current data provides a mechanism for Early Detection and Rapid Response (EDRR) implementation and additional research. A current assessment of invasive species distribution across the U.S. and North America a function of current and future climatic trends will be necessary to implement ecosystem management policies. Such policies can, potentially range from resource allocation for protection of endangered species to interdiction and eradication of resource altering invasive species. Additional collaboration with organization such as the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), which collects and provides information on how land use, climate change and invasive species affect biodiversity, disease ecology, and ecosystem services, provides an example of a platform for holistic ecosystem decision making and management.

The economic basis for invasive species management decisions is provided by the work of USDA Economic Research Service’s (ERS) Program of Research on the Economics of Invasive Species Management (PREISM). The economic information assists decision makers and managers on challenges concerning invasive species questions, policies, and programs addressing invasive species issues related to exclusion, detection, monitoring, eradication, control, and restoration, and their domestic and international components. Bioeconomic principles integrate economic, ecologic and biological data providing policy and management support.[10]

The interaction between the physical (abiotic) changes associated with climate, and the biological processes and interactions of species and food-webs is key to understanding ecosystem function. Leaf canopy and plant diversity within an ecosystem affect macroclimate and subsequently the ability of invasive species to invade ecosystems. Current research modeling attempts to assess at multi-scalar levels the coupled land atmosphere interactions for weather and climate are ongoing but multiyear data sets are rare reflecting the complexity of abiotic and biotic exchanges.[11] The biodynamic interactions of ecosystems for example can register changes in soil moisture as well as seasonal changes in vegetation over various time and spatial scales. Along with these changes, the energy of the sun affects differing surfaces, creating variations in the evolution of temperature and humidity at the surface. The temperature and humidity variations cause dynamic reactions throughout the atmosphere resulting in the winds and clouds. These stochastic processes define weather and climate and consequently the nature and diversity of any ecosystem. The climate of any ecosystem is associated with a specific plant community, (e.g. deserts, rainforest), which in turn, converts light into chemical energy trophic chains and food webs. Respiration by the individual biological organisms and the system itself becomes a part of the climate cycle in a grand interdependent process. The seasonal nature of plant growth and reproduction is connected and dependent upon the size and stochastic nature of climate dynamics.[12]

Ecosystem Impacts
As climate changes therefore, plant communities and their associate animal hosts shift accordingly, with subsequent effects on ecosystem function. If climate increases the opportunities for invasive species to establish, due to the degree or rapidity of the shift, then the ecosystem services, including land-use, human health, economic inputs and quality of life may change according.[13] Historic rates of migration (;10–50 km/100 yr) [14] will be influenced by both habitat fragmentation and the speed of climate change. Potential redistributions of species, therefore, will not happen without human intervention. Climate is among the most important determiners of a species ability to survive and thrive in a particular geographic area and determines in part an invasive species’ viability and impact on expected, necessary ecosystem services and resources. Invasive species are symptomatic of climate change as well as environmental disturbance. The web of strong and weak interactions of climate, human activity and invasive species defines each local ecological system and taken together define Earth’s biosphere. Managing only one of the three processes without consideration of the other two leads to ineffective outcomes.

Climate regulation is influenced by land cover. In some instances, invasive species may effect the emission of NOx, N2O, NH3, and CH4 from altered ecosystems.[15] Invasive species can alter the plant composition of ecosystems and change their structure and function over large areas. As an example: a U.S. Forest Service report finds that “[c]limate change and associated vegetation change interacting with invasive species are also increasingly leading to large wildfires that can further facilitate the establishment of additional invasive plant species.”[16] Further it is conjectured that invasive species “…such as Lepidium latifolium (perennial pepperweed) and Lythrum salicaria (purple loosestrife) change the amount and composition of wetland vegetation in western North America, and may alter regional methane emission, although this remains unstudied.”[17]

Fire which is a physical phenomenon influenced by both the biology of a system and its climate type causes ecosystem disturbances and changes which can allow an intensification of biological invasion. In some sense fire (instantaneous oxidation) and biological invasions (deterministic oxidation by non indigenous species) create the same effect in a native ecosystem. More importantly fire regimes are a determinate process for certain native ecosystems. Changes in climate alter the fire regimes by introducing more or less humidity, more or less rain, or changes in timing and season of precipitation events. Changes in the fire regime of the Sonoran Desert are allowing buffelgrass, Pennisetum ciliare, which tolerates burning better than most long-lived perennials, to persist and spread to the detriment of native species.[18] Along with temperature changes that favor species that germinate and grow better at low temperatures, the hotter fires of buffelgrass combine to create a new ecosystem. The winter storm track of the Sonoran Desert is moving winter rains that “…now generally begin in late November or early December, rather than during the balmy days of late October.”[19]

Climate change may also alter the effectiveness of management strategies for invasive species due to changes in temperature, precipitation, sea level, and carbon dioxide and other atmospheric gases. [20] USDA reports that many plant species “…respond more positively to increasing CO2 than most cash crops, particularly C3 “invasive” weeds.” The same report finds that “…glyphosate, the most widely used herbicide in the United States, loses its efficacy on weeds grown at the increased CO2 levels.”[21] According to Farrar & Williams (1991), although “…[l]ittle information is available for interactions between temperature and CO2. Cold-adapted plants show little response to elevated levels of CO2, with some species showing a decline in biomass accumulation. In general though, increasing temperature will increase sucrose synthesis, transport and utilization for CO2-enriched plants and decrease carbohydrate accumulation within the leaf.”[22] Bunce & Ziska (1995) measured carbon dioxide impact among soy bean cultivars and found that “…increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration may reduce respiration in soybeans, and respiration may be insensitive to climate warming.”[23] Research strongly suggests that while in some plant species carbon dioxide certainly enhances photosynthesis, at the level of leaf canopy, the level of the plant as a whole, the increase carbon dioxide will lead to higher leaf canopy temperatures. And this increase in temperature will lead to an increase in sterility. Increased carbon dioxide will not only cause large leaf and plant structures for our desirable agricultural species, but of course for invasive and weed species that have co-evolved with the crop and humans. The current reduction in farm out-puts (harvests) in Asia could feed over 50 million people. With larger and more vigorous growth of C3 plants including the invasive weeds which compete with the desirable plants, needed farm resource yields will go down and starvation will go up.[24]

The interaction between invasive species, ecosystem dynamics and the exchange of greenhouse gases is also of interest. For example, invasive species can alter the biogeochemical cycles with microbial communities with subsequent effects on greenhouse gas emissions. A study in The ISME Journal states that in “…natural ecosystems, naturally co-evolved belowground multi-tropic interactions may be considerably disrupted when either plants or soil microbes are invading, or when plants or soil microbes are moved to novel environments.”[25] Other studies have found that “(n)on-native plants and animals can alter ecosystem nutrient cycling and soil chemistry through a number of mechanisms. Nitrogen-fixing invaders increase the rate of N input to a system when they replace non- or less-efficiently fixing plants, and when they colonize open areas. (Vitousek & Walker 1989) and (Vitousek et al. 1987) found that the invasion of an N-fixing plant into a young ecosystem in Hawaii increased the rate of ecosystem N accumulation more than fourfold.”[26] A further example is found in an USGS report: “Cheatgrass, (Bromus tectorum), changes the hydrological cycles and biogeochemical cycles, especially carbon and nitrogen, and alters the fire regimes at landscape scales. The species changes the landscape albedo, which affects energy budgets and climate.”[27]

Lewis H. Ziska, a scientist with the USDA-ARS Crop Systems and Global Change Laboratory writes that the “…current distribution of both Japanese honeysuckle and kudzu is limited by low winter temperatures. Global Warming could extend their northern limits by several hundred miles.”[28] However, some invasive species have already taken advantage of warmer temperatures. For example kudzu, an iconic plant invader in the South, has moved steadily northward into the Midwest and was recently spotted in Canada[29]. On the other hand, relatively benign plants that spread northward in warmer temperatures may become invasive pests if their expansion outpaces their natural enemies, according to one study[30]. In marine environments, increasing ocean temperatures may enable invasions of new species such as mussels.[31]

While not the only driver of ecosystem location and function,[32] climate is important to bioeconomic models and management assessment tools[33]. A present, endogenous risk assessment includes niche models that attempt to predict the impact of the physical environment including climate on novel species introductions to ecosystems. However, rapid climate changes can reduce model efficacy and more importantly any policy decision arising from the models. Consequently, the uncertainty presented by invasive species is compounded by the stochastic dynamics of climate change. Fore example, the idea of conserving or preserving specific biological communities at a particular point in time and space is considerably confused or rendered impossible by dramatic changes in climate. The resulting novel ecosystems filled with a new mix of native and non-native species is a field of research still in its infancy. The assisted migration of endangered species may unintentional create new challenges related to biological invasion. Strategic effectiveness requires that we employ sound science to operate from a position of knowledge. Robust monitoring, improved interagency coordination, and expanded research will help us respond quickly, manage efficiently, and take advantage of restoration opportunities that arise.

Invasive species & biological transition states - logical progression
The process of biological invasion, of invasive species movement into and progression within a new ecosystem follows a defined pattern of dynamic states that are non-discrete and continuous over time. The cyclical and iterative processes[34] of biological invasion can be understood as system states of introduction, establishment, naturalization, dispersal, population distribution, and invasion spread.[35] As a major determinant essential for the establishment of a introduced species in a new ecosystem, climate, which is also a cyclical and iterative system, affects each and every stage of the invasion process in ways that are, as yet, difficult to understand and predict.

An introduced organism needs to find climatic and other physical conditions of the environment conducive to its survival. Even if the environment is potentially conducive, the organism needs to find resources necessary for survival, it needs to avoid death, and for many species it needs a mate. Climate affects each of these preconditions of invasion. Both the long term climate patterns and the short term weather events are major factors in determining the viability of the introduced organism. Research by Kolar and Lodge (2002) on non-native fish introduced into the Great Lakes suggested that species with a greater tolerance of abiotic conditions such as temperature may have a greater invasive potential.[36] Increased climate variability would favor those species with phenotypic plasticity and greater genetic variability ability to adapt to unexpected and novel environmental conditions. Work by Franks et al (2007) indicates the importance of seed production and genetic variability in adapting to drought. [37] Understanding of such novel ecosystems that climate change and invasive species will create necessitate theoretical and applied interdisciplinary research.

Physical stressors such as extreme weather events amplify human disturbance patterns providing conditions for invasive species establishment and spread. As the speed of change of climate increases, climate and weather begin to approach each other in scale. This results in physical changes to the ecosystem’s environment (both terrestrially and aquatically) such as water level or change in salinity or acidity. The change in environmental stressors will not only affect invasion biology but will be intrinsic to any study of endangered species. Endangered species and invasive species share the same complex interactions with the physical processes of climate and the socio-economic processes of human disturbance.

Refugium and species diversity functions are reduced and impaired by invasive species. Pimental et al. (2004) note that “[i]nvasive species impact nearly half of the species currently listed as ‘Threatened or Endangered’ under the U.S. Federal Endangered Species Act.”[38] In the Western Ghats where a South American shrub called Siam weed has eliminated most vegetation. The shrub, Chromolaena odorata, introduced in India in the 1840s, produces a chemical, which attracts a fungus, Fusarium semitectum. The fungus causes wilting of local plants and kills seedlings in the vicinity. This species of the sunflower family was and is considered to be one of the most ecologically destructive invasives in the Western Ghats.[39] Habitat loss caused by Arundo donax (giant reed), an escaped garden grass destroys habitat for the endangered bird, the least-billed virio (Raver 1999). Melaleuca quinquenervia has invaded the Everglades crowding out native wildlife (Randall and Marinelli 1996, Fairchild Tropical Garden). [40] Food conversion of solar energy into edible plants and, fodder and fertilizer (e.g. krill, leaves, litter) is impacted by invasive species that reduce yields or destroy crops completely. The economic loss is sufficient for major control efforts to be established by the United States Department of Agriculture.[41] A botanical listing of ecosystem service damaging invasive species totals 896 aquatic and terrestrial species.[42] The loss is not only due to plants, but insects (455 records)[43] and pathogens. An example of an invasive pathogen is “[c]hrysanthemum white rust (Puccinia horiana, "CWR"), a serious fungal disease of chrysanthemums, … can spread quickly in greenhouse and nursery environments, causing severe crop losses.”[44] All of these examples are interconnected and bounded significantly by changes function in climate.

New Pathways for Introductions
Invasive species are both symptomatic of, and contribute to, dysfunctional ecosystems as they reflect an environment under dynamic, constant and unrelenting human and climatic pressures. Human activities provide pathways and are vectors for the introduction and spread of opportunistic, invasive species. [45] Given the exponential increase in international trade and travel, the risk of introducing new species into ecosystems has never been higher. In addition, climate change will alter the routes of planes and ships, especially as new sea routes open up.[46] The U. S. Fish & Wildlife Services wrote in 2997 in Alaska Region Invasive Species News that “[c]limate change can even create new pathways of invasion. An ice-free Northwest Passage in 2007 portends an increase in inter-ocean shipping activity across the Arctic and thus an increase in the movement of species in the ballast water and on the hulls of ships. As climate change enables an increase in arctic development (e.g., oil and gas development and its associated on- and offshore infrastructure), so too does it increase the likelihood of invasion from the movement of bio-fouled drilling rigs and other equipment.”[47] The federal government plays a critical role in preventing the introduction of invasive species through international trade and transport. Ballast water exchange, hull-fouling mitigation, sensible plant and animal import screening, and thorough cargo inspections can help reduce the likelihood of invasive species introductions.

Policy and Legal Responsibilities
Executive Order 13112 requires Federal agencies to address invasive species and establishes the National Invasive Species Council to coordinate planning and response… The International Plant Protection Convention requires analyses of pest risk. Agencies may be able to integrate climate change considerations into their existing risk-assessment protocols and procedures … Environmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) can be used more powerfully to address invasive species.

[1] Rachel Hauser, Steve Archer, Peter Backlund, Jerry Hatfield, Anthony Janetos, Dennis Lettenmaier, Mike G. Ryan, David Schimel, and Margaret Walsh. 2008. The Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture, Land Resources, Water Resources, and Biodiversity in the United States. Synthesis and Assessment Product 4.3 (SAP 4.3):. [Online] May 2008. [Cited: December 17, 2009.] http://www.usda.gov/img/content/EffectsofClimateChangeonUSEcosystem.pdf.

[2] Interactions between invasive species and a changing climate have been an area of limited interdisciplinary scientific investigation and funding. author’s note

[3] A. P. M. Baede: [ed.]. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Working Group I: The Scientific Basis. Appendix I - Glossary. [Online] [Cited: December 17, 2009.] http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/518.htm.

“Climate in a narrow sense is usually defined as the average weather, or more rigorously, as the statistical description in terms of the mean and variability of relevant quantities over a period of time ranging from months to thousands or millions of years. The classical period is 30 years, as defined by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). These quantities are most often surface variables such as temperature, precipitation, and wind. Climate in a wider sense is the state, including a statistical climate system.”

[4] Beck, K. G., & Kenneth Zimmerman, J. D. (ISAC 2006). Invasive Species Definition Clarification and Guidance White Paper. Retrieved March 2009, from http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/docs/council/isacdef.pdf

“Executive Order 13112 – defines an invasive species as “an alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health.”

[5] Menzel, Annette, et al. . The Atmosphere And The Spatial And Temporal Variability Of. [Online] , . [Cited: December 19, 2009.] www.cms.int/publications/pdf/CMS_CimateChange.pdf .

“… react to variations of its atmospheric environment in a sensitive way and it is astounding as to which precision subjective observations of plants are able to reflect the spatial and temporal variability of atmospheric processes across various temporal and spatial scales.”


[6] Editor: Baede, A.P.M. . (n.d.). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Working Group I: The Scientific Basis. Retrieved December 17, 2009, from Appendix I - Glossary: http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/518.htm

[7] Barange, Manuel and Perry, R. Ian. 2009. Physical and ecological impacts of climate change relevant to marine and inland capture fisheries and aquaculture. FAO Document Repository Technical Paper. No. 530. Rome, FAO. pp. 7–106. [Online] 2009. [Cited: December 23, 2009.] ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/012/i0994e/i0994e02a.pdf .

“Direct effects of climate change impact the performance of individual organisms at various stages in their life history via changes in physiology, morphology and behaviour. Climate impacts also occur at the population level via changes in transport processes that influence dispersal and recruitment. Community-level effects are mediated by interacting species (e.g. predators, competitors, etc.), and include climate driven changes in both the abundance and the strength of interactions among these species.”

[8] Cheung, William W. L., et al. 2009. Projecting global marine biodiversity impacts under climate. . [Online] 2009. [Cited: December 22, 2009.] http://www.seaaroundus.org/ClimateChange/images/Cheung-climate-biodiversity-FF-2009.pdf .

[9] Barange, Manuel and Perry, R. Ian. 2009. Physical and ecological impacts of climate change relevant to marine and inland capture fisheries and aquaculture. FAO Document Repository Technical Paper. No. 530. Rome, FAO. pp. 7–106. [Online] 2009. [Cited: December 23, 2009.] ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/012/i0994e/i0994e02a.pdf .

[10] Keller, Reuben P., et al., [ed.]. 2009. Bioeconomics of Invasive Species: Integrating Ecology, Economic, Policy and Management. New York : Oxford University Press, 2009. p. 298. ISBN 978-0-19--536797-3.

[11] Project Director: D. Niyogi. (2005, October 1). Multiscale Assessments Of The Coupled Land Atmosphere Interactions For Weather And Climate Studies. Retrieved December 18, 2009, from USDA CRIS - Purdue: http://www.reeis.usda.gov/web/crisprojectpages/206061.html

[12] Menzel, Annette, et al. . The Atmosphere And The Spatial And Temporal Variability Of. [Online] , . [Cited: December 19, 2009.] www.cms.int/publications/pdf/CMS_CimateChange.pdf .

“It has turned out that the seasonal cycle of plants is to a large degree linked to the temporal and spatial variability of hemispheric scale atmospheric circulation patterns.”

[13] United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2008). Effects of climate change for aquatic invasive species and implications for management and research. Retrieved from Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC. EPA/600/R-08/014.: http://www.epa.gov/ncea

[14] Iverson, Louis R. and Prasad, Anantha M. 1998. Predicting Abundance Of 80 Tree Species Following Climate. Ecological Monographs, 68(4), pp. 465–485. [Online] 1998. [Cited: December 25, 2009.] http://www.fs.fed.us/ne/delaware/4153/iverson18.pdf .

[15] Dukes, Jeffrey S. and Mooney, Harold A. 2004. Disruption of ecosystem processes in western North America. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural, 77: 411-437 . [Online] 2004. http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/Dukes/Dukes&Mooney2004.pdf

[16] Tausch, Robin J. 2008. Invasive Plants and Climate Change. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Climate Change Resource Center. . [Online] 2008. http://www.fs.fed.us/ccrc/topics/invasive-plants.shtml.

, “… a warming climate will often lead to an upward elevational migration of plant species. Because of the rapidity of expected changes in climate, individuals of a native plant species may be lost from their lower-elevation limits faster than they will be able to migrate upward and establish into newly created habitat. This will result in stressed communities with fewer plant species distributed over large areas of the landscape. As ecosystems become simplified, their trophic levels are truncated and their trophic interactions reduced.”

[17] Dukes, Jeffrey S. and Mooney, Harold A. 2004. Disruption of ecosystem processes in western North America. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural, 77: 411-437 . [Online] 2004. http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/Dukes/Dukes&Mooney2004.pdf

[18] Hauser, A. Scott. 2008. Pennisetum ciliare . Fire Effects Information System. [Online] 2008. [Cited: December 29, 2009.] http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ .

[19] Kimball, Sarah and Venable, D. Lawrence. 2009. Warming climate chills Sonoran Desert's spring flowers. University of Arizona . [Online] December 16, 2009. [Cited: December 29, 2009.] http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-12/uoa-wcc121609.php .

[20] Hellmann, J.J., J. E. Byers, B.G. Bierwagen, and J.S. Dukes. 2008. Five potential consequences of climate change for invasive species. James (Jeb) Byers. [Online] 2008. [Cited: December 18, 2009.] http://blackbear.ecology.uga.edu/jebyers/byers

[21] Rachel Hauser, Steve Archer, Peter Backlund, Jerry Hatfield, Anthony Janetos, Dennis Lettenmaier, Mike G. Ryan, David Schimel, and Margaret Walsh. "The Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture, Land Resources, Water Resources, and Biodiversity in the United States." Synthesis and Assessment Product 4.3 (SAP 4.3):. May 2008. http://www.usda.gov/img/content/EffectsofClimateChangeonUSEcosystem.pdf (accessed December 17, 2009).

[22] Farrar, J. F. and Williams, M. L. 1991. The effects of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide and temperature on carbon partitioning, source-sink relations and respiration. Plant, Cell & Environment, Volume 14 Issue 8, Pages 819 - 830. [Online] Blackwell Publishing Ltd, May 21, 1991. [Cited: December 29, 2009.]
[23] Bunce, James A and Ziska, Lewis H. 1996. Responses of Respiration to Increases in Carbon Dioxide Concentration and Temperature in Three Soybean Cultivars . Annals of Botany 77: 507-514 . [Online] Oxford Journals, 1996. [Cited: December 29, 2009.] http://aob.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/77/5/507.

[24] From author’s web log - Invasive Notes: http://ipetrus.blogspot.com/2009/10/co2-increase-impact-question-of.html

[25] Putten, Wim H van der and John N Klironomos, David A Wardle. 2007. Microbial ecology of biological invasions. The ISME Journal (2007) 1, 28–37; doi:10.1038/ismej.2007.9. [Online] February 21, 2007. http://www.nature.com/ismej/journal/v1/n1/full/ismej20079a.html.

[26] Dukes, Jeffrey S. and Mooney, Harold A. 2004. Disruption of ecosystem processes in western North America. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural, 77: 411-437 . [Online] 2004.
http://dge.stanford.edu/DGE/Dukes/Dukes&Mooney2004.pdf.

[27] Schnase, John L. 2008. Science/Cheatgrass. USGS, Invasive Species Forecasting System. [Online] May 8, 2008. http://invasivespecies.gsfc.nasa.gov/cheatgrass.html.

[28] Ziska, Lewis H. Climate Change Impacts on Weeds. Climate Change and Agriculture: Promoting Practical and Profitable Responses. [Online] [Cited: December 18, 2009.] http://www.climateandfarming.org/pdfs/FactSheets/III.1Weeds.pdf .

“Changes in temperature and carbon dioxide are likely to have significant direct (CO2 stimulation of weed growth) and indirect effects (climatic variability) on weed biology. In spite of the importance of weed biology in both the environment and in farms, very little is known regarding the impact of these environmental changes on either the reproductive success of agronomic or invasive weeds, or the potential consequences for their management. Yet,
given what is known, it is clear that the agricultural, environmental and health costs of not understanding the impact of CO2 on weed biology may be substantial. It is hoped therefore that the current article may serve to both emphasize the critical nature of this topic, and to serve as an initial guide to those who wish to recognize the ramifications of rising CO2 beyond the polemic of global warming.”

[29] Posted By: Mark Ribble. 2009. Kudzu Plant Creeps its Way into Canada The plant that ate the south is in Leamington. [Online] October 2009. [Cited: December 18, 2009.] http://www.leamingtonpostandshopper.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1774104 .

[30] University of Florida. Climate Change Opens New Avenue For Spread Of Invasive Plants. ScienceDaily. November 30, 2008. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081119161125.htm (accessed December 18, 2009).

[31] United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2008. Predicting Future Introductions of Nonindigenous Species to the Great Lakes (Final Report) . National Center for Environmental Assessment. [Online] 2008. [Cited: December 20, 2009.] http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=190305 .

.
[32] Pearson, Richard G. and Dawson, Terence P. 2003. Predicting the impacts of climate change on the. [Online] 2003. [Cited: December 18, 2009.] http://www.gbif.es/ficheros/Taller_nichos_09/Pearson_Dawson_2003_GEB_Are.pdf .

[33] Keller, Reuben P., et al., [ed.]. 2009. Bioeconomics of Invasive Species: Integrating Ecology, Economic, Policy and Management. New York : Oxford University Press, 2009. p. 298. ISBN 978-0-19--536797-3.

[34] Davis, Mark A. 2009. Invasion Biology. New York : Oxford University Press, 2009. p. 244. ISBN: 978-0-19-921876-9 (Pbk.).

[35]Henderson, Scott, Dawson, Terence P. and Whittaker, Robert J. 2006. Progress in invasive plants research. [Online] 2006. [Cited: December 21, 2009.] http://www.cfr.washington.edu/classes.cfr.303/CurrentResearchInvasive06.pdf.
[36]Davis, Mark A. 2009. Invasion Biology. New York : Oxford University Press, 2009. p. 244. ISBN: 978-0-19-921876-9 (Pbk.).

[37]Franks, Steven J., Sim, Sheina and Weis, Arthur E. 2007. Rapid evolution of flowering time by an annual. PNAS vol. 104, no. 4: 1278–1282. [Online] January 23, 2007. [Cited: December 28, 2009.]
[38] Pimentel, David, Zuniga, Rodolpho and Morrison, Doug. 2004. Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecological Economics, ScienceDirect. [Online] 2004. [Cited: December 21, 2009.] http://ipm.ifas.ufl.edu/pdf/EconomicCosts_invasives.pdf
.
[39] Narayanan, Sumana. 2008. Invasive species in Western Ghats affects plants . Journal of Ecology (Vol 96, No 1). [Online] 2008. http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/node/18562.

[40] Hall, Meredith. 2000. IPlants: Invasive Plants and the Nursery Industry. Center for Environmental Studies. [Online] 2000. http://www.brown.edu/Research/EnvStudies_Theses/full9900/mhall/IPlants/index.html.
[41] Tasker, Alan V. [contact]. 2008. Noxious Weeds Program. USDA APHIS at NAL. [Online] June 11, 2008. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/plant_pest_info/weeds/index.shtml.
“The APHIS Federal noxious weed program is designed to prevent the introduction into the United States of nonindigenous invasive plants and to prevent the spread of newly introduced invasive plants within the United States. APHIS noxious weed activities include exclusion, permitting, eradication of incipient infestations, survey, data management, public education, and (in cooperation with other agencies and state agencies) integrated management of introduced weeds, including biological control.”

[42] Sinnott, Quinn [contact]. 2007. National Plant Germplasm System. USDA ARS Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). [Online] April 5, 2007. http://www.ars-grin.gov/npgs/aboutgrin.html.

[43]__________. 2009. Invasive and Exotic Insects. Invasive.org: Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health. [Online] March 5, 2009. http://www.invasive.org/species/insects.cfm.

[44] Massachusetts Introduced Pests Outreach Project . 2008. Pathogen alert: Chrysanthemum White Rust detected in Massachusetts. Massachusetts Dept. of Agricultural Resources and the UMass Extension Agriculture and Landscape Program. [Online] September 28, 2008. http://massnrc.org/pests/linkeddocuments/pestalerts/CWR_Sep2008.html.

[45] Wittenberg, Rüdiger and Cock, Matthew J.W. 2001. How to Address One of the Greatest Threats to Biodiversity: A Toolkit of Best Prevention and Management Practices. Global Invasive Species Programme, CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK, xx + xxlots pp. [Online] 2001. http://www.hear.org/Pier/pdf/gisp_toolkit.pdf.

“ Biological invasions by non-native species constitute one of the leading threats to natural ecosystems and biodiversity, and they also impose an enormous cost on agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and other human enterprises, as well as on human health. The ways in which non-native species affect native species and ecosystems are numerous and usually irreversible. The impacts are sometimes massive but often subtle. Natural barriers such as oceans, mountains, rivers, and deserts that allowed the intricate coevolution of species and the development of unique ecosystems have been breached over the past five centuries, and especially during the twentieth century, by rapidly accelerating human trade and travel (Case Study 1.1 “Acceleration of Colonization Rates inHawaii”). Planes, ships, and other forms of modern transport have allowed both deliberate and inadvertent movement of species between different parts of the globe, often resulting in unexpected and sometimes disastrous consequences.”

[46] Pyke, CR, Thomas RT, Porter RD, Hellmann JJ, Dukes JS, Lodge DM, Chavarria G. 2008. Current practices and future opportunities for policy on climate change and invasive species. [Online] 2008. [Cited: December 18, 2009.] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5279390_Current_practices_and_future_opportunities_for_policy_on_climate_change_and_invasive_species .

[47] United States Fish & Wildlife Service. 2007. Alaska Region Invasive Species News. [Online] September-October 2007. [Cited: December 18, 2009.] http://alaska.fws.gov/fisheries/invasive/pdf/news_1007.pdf .