Forecasting the Vulnerability of Lakes to Aquatic Plant Invasions

Abstract

Invasive aquatic plants affect aesthetics, drainage for agriculture and forestry, commercial and sport fishing, drinking water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, flood control, habitats for other plants, human and animal health, hydropower generation, irrigation, navigation, recreational boating, swimming, water conservation and transport, and, ultimately, land values. Because most invasive aquatic plants species have been introduced to this country from abroad, they do not have natural control agents or competitors and they tend to dominate the aquatic systems to which they are exposed. The magnitude of only a few of their impacts has been measured and then, generally, over limited areas. A few well-documented studies, however, provide a basis for estimating the general scale of these affects for the nation as a whole, and might serve as a guide for an appropriate magnitude of response.There are difficulties in estimating the economic impacts of aquatic weeds (or, conversely, the benefits of their control) due to the "public-good" nature of aquatic resources and the resulting fact that few of these impacts or benefits pass through economic markets. In spite of these difficulties, it can be conservatively estimated that the values-at-risk from aquatic invasive plants in the US is in the range of billions of dollars per year.Significant sums (at least $100 million) are spent each year in the control of aquatic weeds, however, and the estimated benefits of control are consistently reported to be much higher than these costs. Given the continuing spread of problem species and the difficulty of organizing collective action to control aquatic weeds, it seems likely that too little is being spent on control rather than too much. Furthermore, much could be done to facilitate the further development and use of aquatic weed control techniques.Although the costs and environmental effects of aquatic weed control have been intensively studied, new technologies for their control are continually being evaluated and developed. Continued attention seems warranted to develop weed control techniques and strategies that moderate costs, meet competing objectives, and minimize the potential for unintended environmental harm. In addition, an accelerated invasion of exotic animal species suggests a more integrated approach to the management of aquatic ecosystems.

Non‐native Chinese mystery snail (Bellamya chinensis) supports consumers in urban lake food webs

“…Shorelines of undeveloped lakes are surrounded by dense canopies of native evergreen and less abundant deciduous trees, whereas developed lakes are characterized by open space, ornamental gardens and grass lawns, non‐native shrubs, and native deciduous trees that typically outnumber evergreen tree species. Lakes were selected using data from previous surveys (presented in Tamayo and Olden ), and by examining monthly monitoring data from King County's Lake Stewardship Program (http://www.kingcounty.gov), to ensure high similarity in surface area and mean depth; all lakes were small, summer stratified, and oligo‐ to mesotrophic (Table ).…”

Classifying nuisance submerged vegetation depending on ecosystem services

“…Anderson (2003), Clayton and Champion (2006), David et al (2006), Madsen (1998), Santos et al (2009), Schwarz andHoward-Williams (1993), Stallings et al (2015) and Tamayo and Olden (2014) [2] Charudattan (2001) a and Cruz et al (2015) Egeria najas Planch.…”

“…[2] Bailey and Calhoun (2008) and Hilt et al (2006) Limnology [19] Alwin et al (2010), Anderson (2003), Berger et al (2015), Burlakova and Karatayev (2007), Clayton and Champion (2006), Fulmer and Robinson (2008), Goodenberger and Klaiber (2016), Harman et al (2005), Madsen (1993Madsen ( , 1998, Newman et al (1996), Nichols and Shaw (1986), Poirrier et al (2010), Reeves et al (2008), Richardson (2008), Stalling et al (2015), Tamayo and Olden (2014), Trebitz et al (1993) and Zefferman and Harris (2016) [6] Abernethy et al (1996), Cason and Roost (2011) Najas minor All.…”

“…[6] Albright and Ode (2011), Anderson (2003), Fulmer and Robinson (2008), Nichols and Shaw (1986), Tamayo and Olden (2014) and Zefferman and Harris (2016) [1] Nichols (1991) a…”

“…St. John, Egeria densa Planch. and Cabomba caroliniana Gray, have caused many problems for humans worldwide (Smith and Barko 1990;Di Nino et al 2005;Wilson et al 2007;Tamayo and Olden 2014). However, these effects are not limited to invasive species (Anderson 2003;Hilt et al 2006), as any macrophyte species that forms large stands may cause nuisance to one of the freshwater ecosystem functions or services.…”