Invasive alien plant management.

Abstract

A number of policies, strategies and tools are available for the management of invasive alien plants. This review considers these and their suitability in the light of developing theory and practical experience. Policies range from quarantine and eradication to containment and asset protection. While there is scope for modelling the potential spread and impact of invasive plants, these factors are invariably species-specific and a land manager is typically faced with the problem of dealing with several species simultaneously. Weed risk management systems have been developed to prioritize species management actions. These systems will be improved by further efforts to encompass uncertainty. Most management actions require long time-frames, and institutional commitment, as well as stakeholder involvement for successful outcomes.

Managing invasive species in cities: A framework from Cape Town, South Africa

“…66 We use this city to highlight challenges that will be faced by an increasing number of cities given 67 ongoing urbanization and growing human populations. 68 Our objectives are to utilize this case study: (1) to review the challenges faced by managers who 69 seek to control invasive species in an urban environment; and (2) to develop a framework to 70 assist environmental managers globally as they seek to integrate a range of management options 71 for invasive species in urban systems to deal with diverse and often conflicting views of what is 72 appropriate.…”

Diversity of alien roadside herbs along an elevational gradient in western Mexico

“…For eradication success, the size of the distribution area of the alien species and the time since the initial introduction are highly relevant (Coulston 2004;Mack and Lonsdale 2004;West 2004;Gardener et al 2009;Kettenring and Adams 2011;Pluess et al 2012). In the case of western Mexico with low total numbers of alien species, which have been introduced recently and not yet expanded, targeted management could make containment possible (Bruce and Johnson 2014). The large number of native weedy plants may help with management.…”

Management feasibility of established invasive plant species in Queensland, Australia: A stakeholders’ perspective

“…Prioritization of IAS for management is increasingly being discussed in the public arena. However few studies, as presented in this work, have combined pest risk assessment with risk management to guide towards informed decision for policy, research and management, especially for post border (established) invaders (Heikkilä, 2011;Auld and Johnson, 2014;Booy et al, 2017). By means of structured elicitation, we engaged stakeholders for inputs, and based on their consensus scores and levels of confidence we have been able to gauge public attitudes regarding perceived threats and management decisions on established IAS in the State of QLD, Australia.…”

“…Most prioritization on IAS are based on the concept of risk rating -a product of probability of exposure and severity of the impact of that exposure (Leung et al, 2012;Osunkoya et al, 2018). However, many prioritizations of pests, including post-border weed risk systems, rarely assess the feasibility of managing those risks (Randall et al, 2008;Kumschick et al,2012;Auld and Johnson, 2014;Booy et al, 2017). Both risk assessment and management feasibility are essential for effective prioritization: the risk assessment examines the threat or hazard, while the risk management evaluates and informs cost-effective management options.…”

“…Both risk assessment and management feasibility are essential for effective prioritization: the risk assessment examines the threat or hazard, while the risk management evaluates and informs cost-effective management options. It has been argued that not including feasibility of management in pest risk decision is likely to produce a sub-optimal outcome (Heikkilä, 2011;Auld and Johnson, 2014) (see also https:// ipmdat.org/index. html-accessed Feb 15, 2019).…”