Overview:
Controlling invasive, nonnative plants is a common and challenging problem in natural resource management. Once established, they quickly reproduce and spread seed and have the potential to negatively impact native systems by outcompeting and displacing native species, disrupting ecological processes, and reducing native biodiversity. These plants are introduced from others areas, either intentionally or accidentally, and require a tremendous amount of land management resources and funding to map, monitor, and eradicate.
This assessment looked at three metrics: percent of the populations managed, number of populations eradicated, and number of species eradicated. Species were classified by management priority. The goal for priority 1 species is for complete eradication from all areas. For priority 2 species, populations are managed for containment to specific watersheds and eradication where possible. Lastly, priority 3 species are treated opportunistically when time and resources are available.
The total number of priority 1 & 2 species populations were higher in the Coastal Study Area compared to the Central, and a smaller percentage of those populations are under management, although the difference is less than 10%.
Metrics 2 and 3 measure eradication, which is difficult to do and requires several years of monitoring to confirm successful removal. As such, the total number of populations and species removed are low (less than ten in all cases), with the Central Study Area faring slightly better. Regardless, both metrics for both study areas are in a state of significant concern.
Overall, non-native, invasive plants as a stressor in both the Coastal and Central Study Areas are in a state of significant concern, an assessment in which there is a low level of confidence due to a lack of consistent, long-term data collection.
The analysis for this chapter is still underway and more details will be added as they emerge.
