Managing Invasive Species: Conclusion

Today marks the end for the 'Managing Invasive Species' chapter of this blog. I could keep going but no one likes a series that goes on for too long (Lost, I'm looking at you...). I'm taking the all good things must come to an end approach and retiring it at its peak.

Beginning with a recap, most conservation biologists believe that species invasions should be prevented wherever possible (Larson et al., 2013), however the methods for doing so are extremely wide ranging.

Aim for prevention where possible, things can escalate quickly once that threshold had passed. Source: Invasive Species Ireland

The first management approach I tackled was eradication. This was frequently effective in its initial aim of wiping out 'Invasive Species X' but often had negative side effects and could be expensive when taking account of environmental monitoring afterwards.

Second, I looked at legislation. In principle, this seemed to be a good idea. However, implementation of policy, especially at the international scale, was fraught with difficulty and often unable to become effective.

Next I looked at some alternatives. The strategy of human consumption (A fellow invasive species blogger has also recently analysed this strategy.) is thought to be potentially effective for Asian Carp management in the U.S.A. However at this early stage, it's difficult to be sure. Additionally this approach falls down by the fact that there are plenty of inedible invaders. 

I also considered biotic resistance, where we, as humans, don't act, and we allow natural predator-prey relations suppress the invaders. There was a case where this appeared to work, but it clearly isn't always effective, otherwise I guess there would be no prevailing invasive species! And this blog would be short on material...

Finally, I looked at public participation (for more on the related topic of 'Citizen Science' check out a recent post by Rachel Harris here). This approach has been effective at halting the spread of the Killer Shrimp in the UK, and it's cheap, but it is heavily reliant on the fact that people give a damn. And, maybe I'm bitter, but I don't think everyone does... And of course, there is plenty the public are plainly unable to do due to lack of resources.

So, all of these analysed. All with some good points, all with some bad. What is our best option?

In my opinion, when we uncover a potential troublemaker of an invasive species, we need to consider all the possible options for approaching its management. I mean, what would be the point in eradicating something when we can find a human use for it?

Research is clearly the key to choosing the best management approach for each individual case. Heck, it may even suggest a combination of approaches as the best way forward. I'm sure there are plenty of members of the public who would be up for removing invasive weeds rather than pumping in chemicals to eradicate them. 

Overall, here are some key point to take from this management series:

1. Where possible, the most effective course of action is, of course, to prevent invasive species establishing.
2. If dealing with an established invasive species, treat each case uniquely, and take the best possible action after considering all available evidence.
3. There is no 'one size fits all' solution to invasive species management. The benefits and costs of each approach should be accounted for in each case.

Invasive species management process cycle, note the high number of stages before implementation itself. Source Invasive Species International

When I started this series, I knew that I wouldn't find 'an answer' on how to manage invasive species, so to speak, but rather engage in a discussion of possible options to highlight the very fact that there isn't 'one'. There have been successes and failures when it comes to managing invasive species regarding all the strategies covered, but hopefully, as our ecological knowledge grows, the former will soon greatly outweigh the latter.

Over and out

The Invader Inspector