Evaluating progress in weed eradication programs

Evaluating progress towards eradication is critically important because weed eradication programs are very expensive and may take more than 10 years to complete. The degree of confidence that can be placed in any measure of eradication progress is a function of the effort that has been invested in finding new infestations and in monitoring known infestations. Determining eradication endpoints is particularly difficult, since plants may be extremely difficult to detect when at low densities and it is virtually impossible to demonstrate seed bank exhaustion. Recent work suggests that an economic approach to this problem should be adopted. They propose some rules of thumb to determine whether to continue an eradication program or switch to an alternative management strategy.

Progress towards the eradication of three melastome shrub species from northern Australian rainforests

To eradicate a weed incursion, its extent must be delimited and each infestation extirpated. Measures for delimitation and extirpation are utilized to assess the progress of eradication programs currently targeting three melastome shrub species (Clidemia hirta, Miconia nervosa and M. racemosa) in north-eastern Australia. The main infested area for each species was determined during the year after initial detection, but expanded surveys have led to the discovery of isolated, smaller outlying patches. Programs are refining survey methods (including search frequency) to prevent reproduction. Weed incursions that are limited to single infestations represent a prime opportunity for eradication. However, population and dispersal data indicate that eradication will require an ongoing investment for some time for all three species. Highly persistent seed and dispersal by frugivores suggest that eradication may prove extraordinarily difficult should any of these species spread or be discovered at more locations.

Surveillance protocols for management of invasive plants: modelling Chilean needle grass (Nassella neesiana) in Australia

Aim: To develop a surveillance support model that enables prediction of areas susceptible to invasion, comparative analysis of surveillance methods and intensity and assessment of eradication feasibility. To apply the model to identify surveillance protocols for generalized invasion scenarios and for evaluating surveillance and control for a context-specific plant invasion. Location: Australia. Methods: We integrate a spatially explicit simulation model, including plant demography and dispersal vectors, within a Geographical Information System. We use the model to identify effective surveillance protocols using simulations of generalized plant life-forms spreading via different dispersal mechanisms in real landscapes. We then parameterize the surveillance support model for Chilean needle grass [CNG; Nassella neesiana (Trin. & Rupr.) Barkworth], a highly invasive tussock grass, which is an eradication target in south-eastern Queensland, Australia. Results: General surveillance protocols that can guide rapid response surveillance were identified; suitable habitat that is susceptible to invasion through particular dispersal syndromes should be targeted for surveillance using an adaptive seek-and-destroy method. The search radius of the adaptive method should be based on maximum expected dispersal distances. Protocols were used to define a surveillance strategy for CNG, but simulations indicated that despite effective and targeted surveillance, eradication is implausible at current intensities. Main conclusions: Several important surveillance protocols emerged and simulations indicated that effectiveness can be increased if they are followed in rapid response surveillance. If sufficient data are available, the surveillance support model should be parameterized to target areas susceptible to invasion and determine whether surveillance is effective and eradication is feasible. We discovered that for CNG, regardless of a carefully designed surveillance strategy, eradication is implausible at current intensities of surveillance and control and these efforts should be doubled if they are to be successful. This is crucial information in the face of environmentally and economically damaging invasive species and large, expensive and potentially ineffective control programmes.

Eradication of invasive species: progress and emerging issues in the 21st century

At an international conference on the eradication of invasive species, held in 2001, Simberloff (2002) noted some past successes in eradication—from the global eradication of smallpox (Fenner et al. 1988) to the many successful eradications of populations (mostly mammals) from small islands (e.g. Veitch and Bell 1990; Burbidge and Morris 2002). However, he cautioned that we needed to be more ambitious and aim higher if we are to prevent and reverse the growing threat of the homogenization of global biodiversity. In this chapter we review how the management strategy of eradication—the permanent removal of entire discrete populations—has contributed to the stretch in goals advocated by Simberloff. We also discuss impediments to eradication success, and summarize how some of the lessons learnt during this process have contributed to the other strategies (prevention and sustained control) that are required to manage the wider threat posed by invasive alien species. We concentrate on terrestrial vertebrates and weeds (our areas of expertise), but touch on terrestrial invertebrates and marine and freshwater species in the discussion on emerging issues, to illustrate some of the different constraints these taxa and habitats impose on the feasibility of eradication.

Optimal eradication: when to stop looking for an invasive plant

The notion of being sure that you have completely eradicated an invasive species is fanciful because of imperfect detection and persistent seed banks. Eradication is commonly declared either on an ad hoc basis, on notions of seed bank longevity, or on setting arbitrary thresholds of 1% or 5% confidence that the species is not present. Rather than declaring eradication at some arbitrary level of confidence, we take an economic approach in which we stop looking when the expected costs outweigh the expected benefits. We develop theory that determines the number of years of absent surveys required to minimize the net expected cost. Given detection of a species is imperfect, the optimal stopping time is a trade-off between the cost of continued surveying and the cost of escape and damage if eradication is declared too soon. A simple rule of thumb compares well to the exact optimal solution using stochastic dynamic programming. Application of the approach to the eradication programme of Helenium amarum reveals that the actual stopping time was a precautionary one given the ranges for each parameter.

Is the distribution of Fiji leaf gall in Australian sugarcane explained by variation in the vector Perkinsiella saccharicida?

Fiji leaf gall (FLG) is an important virally induced disease in Australian sugarcane. It is confined to southern canegrowing areas, despite its vector, the delphacid planthopper Perkinsiella saccharicida, occurring in all canegrowing areas of Queensland and New South Wales. This disparity between distributions could be a result of successful containment of the disease through quarantine and/or geographical barriers, or because northern Queensland populations of Perkinsiella may be poorer vectors of the disease. These hypotheses were first tested by investigating variation in the ITS2 region of the rDNA fragment among eastern Australian and overseas populations of Perkinsiella. The ITS2 sequences of the Western Australian P. thompsoni and the Fijian P. vitiensis were distinguishable from those of P. saccharicida and there was no significant variation among the 26 P. saccharicida populations. Reciprocal crosses of a northern Queensland and a southern Queensland population of P. saccharicida were fertile, so they may well be conspecific. Single vector transmission experiments showed that a population of P. saccharicida from northern Queensland had a higher vector competency than either of two southern Queensland populations. The frequency of virus acquisition in the vector populations was demonstrated to be important in the vector competency of the planthopper. The proportion of infected vectors that transmitted the virus to plants was not significantly different among the populations tested. This study shows that the absence of FLG from northern Queensland is not due to a lack of vector competency of the northern population of P. saccharicida.

Weed eradication - an economic perspective

There has been recent interest in determining the upper limits to the feasibility of weed eradication. Although a number of disparate factors determine the success of an eradication program, ultimately eradication feasibility must be viewed in the context of the amount of investment that can be made. The latter should reflect the hazard posed by an invasion, with greater investment justified by greater threats. In simplest terms, the effort (and hence investment) to achieve weed eradication comprises the detection effort required to delimit an invasion plus the search and control effort required to prevent reproduction until extirpation occurs over the entire infested area. The difficulty of estimating the required investment at the commencement of a weed eradication program (as well as during periodic reviews) is a serious problem. Bioeconomics show promise in determining the optimal approach to managing weed invasions, notwithstanding ongoing difficulties in estimating the costs and benefits of eradication and alternative invasion management strategies. A flexible approach to the management of weed invasions is needed, allowing for the adoption of another strategy when it becomes clear that the probability of eradication is low, owing to resourcing or intractable technical issues. Whether the considerable progress that has been achieved towards eradication of the once massive witchweed invasion can be duplicated for other weeds of agricultural systems will depend to a large extent upon investment (. $250 million over 50 yr in this instance). Weeds of natural ecosystems seem destined to remain more difficult eradication targets for a variety of reasons, including higher impedance to eradication, more difficulty in valuing the benefits arising from eradication, and possibly less willingness to pay from society at large.

Applying a simulation model to the management of an infestation of Miconia calvescens in the wet tropics of Australia

A simulation model that combines biological, search and economic components is applied to the eradication of a Miconia calvescens infestation at El Arish in tropical Queensland, Australia. Information on the year M. calvescens was introduced to the site, the number of plants controlled and the timing of control, is used to show that currently there could be M. calvescens plants remaining undetected at the site, including some mature plants. Modelling results indicate that the eradication programme has had a significant impact on the population of M. calvescens, as shown by simulated results for uncontrolled and controlled populations. The model was also used to investigate the effect of changing search effort on the cost of and time to eradication. Control costs were found to be negligible over all levels of search effort tested. Importantly, results suggest eradication may be achieved within several decades, if resources are increased slightly from their current levels and if there is a long-term commitment to funding the eradication programme.

WHIPPET: a novel tool for prioritizing invasive plant populations for regional eradication

Large geographic areas can have numerous incipient invasive plant populations that necessitate eradication. However, resources are often deficient to address every infestation. Within the United States, weed lists (either state-level or smaller unit) generally guide the prioritization of eradication of each listed species uniformly across the focus region. This strategy has several limitations that can compromise overall effectiveness, which include spending limited resources on 1) low impact populations, 2) difficult to access populations, or 3) missing high impact populations of low priority species. Therefore, we developed a novel science-based, transparent, analytical ranking tool to prioritize weed populations, instead of species, for eradication and tested it on a group of noxious weeds in California. For outreach purposes, we named the tool WHIPPET (Weed Heuristics: Invasive Population Prioritization for Eradication Tool). Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process that included expert opinion, we developed three major criteria, four sub-criteria, and four sub-sub-criteria, taking into account both species and population characteristics. Subject matter experts weighted and scored these criteria to assess the relative impact, potential spread, and feasibility of eradication (major criteria) for 100 total populations of 19 species. Species-wide population scores indicated that conspecific populations do not necessarily group together in the final ranked output. Thus, priority lists based solely on species-level characteristics are less effective compared to a blended prioritization based on both species attributes and individual population and site parameters. WHIPPET should facilitate a more efficacious decision-making process allocating limited resources to target invasive plant infestations with the greatest predicted impacts to the region under consideration.

Tertiary Treatment of Ayr Municipal Wastewater using Bioremediation: A Pilot-Scale Study. A Report Prepared for the Burdekin Shire Council and the Burdekin Rangeland Reef Initiative

This joint DPI/Burdekin Shire Council project assessed the efficacy of a pilot-scale biological remediation system to recover Nitrogen (N) and Phosphorous (P) nutrients from secondary treated municipal wastewater at the Ayr Sewage Treatment Plant. Additionally, this study considered potential commercial uses for by-products from the treatment system. Knowledge gained from this study can provide directions for implementing a larger-scale final effluent treatment protocol on site at the Ayr plant. Trials were conducted over 10 months and assessed nutrient removal from duckweed-based treatments and an algae/fish treatment – both as sequential and as stand-alone treatment systems. A 42.3% reduction in Total N was found through the sequential treatment system (duckweed followed by algae/fish treatment) after 6.6 days Effluent Retention Time (E.R.T.). However, duckweed treatment was responsible for the majority of this nutrient recovery (7.8 times more effective than algae/fish treatment). Likewise, Total P reduction (15.75% reduction after 6.6 days E.R.T.) was twice as great in the duckweed treatment. A phytoplankton bloom, which developed in the algae/fish tanks, reduced nutrient recovery in this treatment. A second trial tested whether the addition of fish enhanced duckweed treatment by evaluating systems with and without fish. After four weeks operation, low DO under the duckweed blanket caused fish mortalities. Decomposition of these fish led to an additional organic load and this was reflected in a breakdown of nitrogen species that showed an increase in organic nitrogen. However, the Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen (DIN: ammonia, nitrite and nitrate) removal was similar between treatments with and without fish (57% and 59% DIN removal from incoming, respectively). Overall, three effluent residence times were evaluated using duckweed-based treatments; i.e. 3.5 days, 5.5 days and 10.4 days. Total N removal was 37.5%, 55.7% and 70.3%, respectively. The 10.4-day E.R.T. trial, however, was evaluated by sequential nutrient removal through the duckweed-minus-fish treatment followed by the duckweed-plus-fish treatment. Therefore, the 70.3% Total N removal was lower than could have been achieved at this retention time due to the abovementioned fish mortalities. Phosphorous removal from duckweed treatments was greatest after 10.4-days E.R.T. (13.6%). Plant uptake was considered the most important mechanism for this P removal since there was no clay substrate in the plastic tanks that could have contributed to P absorption as part of the natural phosphorous cycle. Duckweed inhibited phytoplankton production (therefore reducing T.S.S) and maintained pH close to neutral. DO beneath the duckweed blanket fell to below 1ppm; however, this did not limit plant production. If fish are to be used as part of the duckweed treatment, air-uplifts can be installed that maintain DO levels without disturbing surface waters. Duckweed grown in the treatments doubled its biomass on average every 5.7 days. On a per-surface area basis, 1.23kg/m2 was harvested weekly. Moisture content of duckweed was 92%, equating to a total dry weight harvest of 0.098kg/m2/week. Nutrient analysis of dried duckweed gave an N content of 6.67% and a P content of 1.27%. According to semi-quantitative analyses, harvested duckweed contained no residual elements from the effluent stream that were greater than ANZECC toxicant guidelines proposed for aquaculture. In addition, jade perch, a local aquaculture species, actively consumed and gained weight on harvested duckweed, suggesting potential for large-scale fish production using by-products from the effluent treatment process. This suggests that a duckweed-based system may be one viable option for tertiary treatment of Ayr municipal wastewater. The tertiary detention lagoon proposed by the Burdekin Shire Council, consisting of six bays approximately 290 x 35 metres (x 1.5 metres deep), would be suitable for duckweed culture with minor modification to facilitate the efficient distribution of duckweed plants across the entire available growing surface (such as floating containment grids). The effluent residence time resulting from this proposed configuration (~30 days) should be adequate to recover most effluent nutrients (certainly N) based on the current trial. Duckweed harvest techniques on this scale, however, need to be further investigated. Based on duckweed production in the current trial (1.23kg/m2/week), a weekly harvest of approximately 75 000kg (wet weight) could be expected from the proposed lagoon configuration under full duckweed production. A benefit of the proposed multi-bay lagoon is that full lagoon production of duckweed may not be needed to restore effluent to a desirable standard under the present nutrient load, and duckweed treatment may be restricted to certain bays. Restored effluent could be released without risk of contaminating the receiving waterway with duckweed by evacuating water through an internal standpipe located mid-way in the water column.

Predicting the cost of eradication for 41 Class 1 declared weeds in Queensland

The feasibility of state-wide eradication of 41 invasive plant taxa currently listed as ‘Class 1 declared pests’ under the Queensland Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002 was assessed using the predictive model ‘WeedSearch’. Results indicated that all but one species (Alternanthera philoxeroides) could be eradicated, provided sufficient funding and labour were available. Slightly less than one quarter (24.4%) (n = 10) of Class 1 weed taxa could be eradicated for less than $100 000 per taxon. An additional 43.9% (n = 18) could be eradicated for between $100 000 and $1M per taxon. Hence, 68.3% of Class 1 weed taxa (n = 28) could be eradicated for less than $1M per taxon. Eradication of 29.3% (n = 12) is predicted to cost more than $1M per taxon. Comparison of these WeedSearch outputs with either empirical analysis or results from a previous application of the model suggests that these costs may, in fact, be underestimates. Considering the likelihood that each weed will cost the state many millions of dollars in long-term losses (e.g. losses to primary production, environmental impacts and control costs), eradication seems a wise investment. Even where predicted costs are over $1M, eradication can still offer highly favourable benefit:cost ratios. The total (cumulative) cost of eradication of all 41 weed taxa is substantial; for all taxa, the estimated cost of eradication in the first year alone is $8 618 000. This study provides important information for policy makers, who must decide where to invest public funding.

Estimating and influencing the duration of weed eradication programmes

1. Weed eradication efforts often must be sustained for long periods owing to the existence of persistent seed banks, among other factors. Decision makers need to consider both the amount of investment required and the period over which investment must be maintained when determining whether to commit to (or continue) an eradication programme. However, a basis for estimating eradication programme duration based on simple data has been lacking. Here, we present a stochastic dynamic model that can provide such estimates. 2. The model is based upon the rates of progression of infestations from the active to the monitoring state (i.e. no plants detected for at least 12 months), rates of reversion of infestations from monitoring to the active state and the frequency distribution of time since last detection for all infestations. Isoquants that illustrate the combinations of progression and reversion parameters corresponding to eradication within different time frames are generated. 3. The model is applied to ongoing eradication programmes targeting branched broomrape Orobanche ramosa and chromolaena Chromolaena odorata. The minimum periods in which eradication could potentially be achieved were 22 and 23 years, respectively. On the basis of programme performance until 2008, however, eradication is predicted to take considerably longer for both species (on average, 62 and 248 years, respectively). Performance of the branched broomrape programme could be best improved through reducing rates of reversion to the active state; for chromolaena, boosting rates of progression to the monitoring state is more important. 4. Synthesis and applications. Our model for estimating weed eradication programme duration, which captures critical transitions between a limited number of states, is readily applicable to any weed.Aparticular strength of the method lies in its minimal data requirements. These comprise estimates of maximum seed persistence and infested area, plus consistent annual records of the detection (or otherwise) of the weed in each infestation. This work provides a framework for identifying where improvements in management are needed and a basis for testing the effectiveness of alternative tactics. If adopted, our approach should help improve decision making with regard to eradication as a management strategy.

Estimating the duration and cost of weed eradication programmes

Two prerequisites for realistically embarking upon an eradication programme are that cost-benefit analysis favours this strategy over other management options and that sufficient resources are available to carry the programme through to completion. These are not independent criteria, but it is our view that too little attention has been paid to estimating the investment required to complete weed eradication programmes. We deal with this problem by using a two-pronged approach: 1) developing a stochastic dynamic model that provides an estimation of programme duration; and 2) estimating the inputs required to delimit a weed incursion and to prevent weed reproduction over a sufficiently long period to allow extirpation of all infestations. The model is built upon relationships that capture the time-related detection of new infested areas, rates of progression of infestations from the active to the monitoring stage, rates of reversion of infestations from the monitoring to active stage, and the frequency distribution of time since last detection for all infestations. This approach is applied to the branched broomrape (Orobanche ramosa) eradication programme currently underway in South Australia. This programme commenced in 1999 and currently 7450 ha are known to be infested with the weed. To date none of the infestations have been eradicated. Given recent (2008) levels of investment and current eradication methods, model predictions are that it would take, on average, an additional 73 years to eradicate this weed at an average additional cost (NPV) of $AU67.9m. When the model was run for circumstances in 2003 and 2006, the average programme duration and total cost (NPV) were predicted to be 159 and 94 years, and $AU91.3m and $AU72.3m, respectively. The reduction in estimated programme length and cost may represent progress towards the eradication objective, although eradication of this species still remains a long term prospect.

Beyond fecundity control: which weeds are most containable?

1. Eradication is often the preferred strategy in the management of new weed invasions, but recent research has shown that the circumstances under which eradication can be achieved are highly constrained. Containment is a component of an eradication strategy and also a management objective in its own right. Just as for eradication, containment of a weed invasion should be attempted only if it is considered feasible. However, very little guidance exists for the assessment of containment feasibility for weeds. 2. Numerous factors have been proposed as influencing feasibility of containment, but those that relate to the potential for management of dispersal pathways and timely detection of new foci of infestation appear to be critical. Theory suggests that the rate of spread is largely driven by long-distance dispersal (LDD). However, LDD is generally unpredictable and often occurs for species that do not appear to be adapted for it. Furthermore, many (if not most) LDD events fail to give rise to new infestations. 3. As the probability of colonisation is related to the numbers of propagules immigrating ('propagule pressure') at a point in the landscape, dispersal pathways that move relatively large numbers of propagules simultaneously and/or repeatedly should most enhance weed spread. It is these pathways whose potential for management has the greatest bearing upon containment feasibility. A key impediment to containment is undetected spread; this need not occur through LDD and is more likely to occur through dispersal to lesser distances. 4. Synthesis and applications. Feasibility of containment should be viewed in terms of the effort required to reduce weed spread rate, as well as the effectiveness of relevant management actions. Where dispersal vectors are not readily manageable and the probability of detection via structured and/or unstructured surveillance is low, a much greater reliance upon fecundity control will be needed to contain a weed. A combination of empirical and theoretical approaches should be used to develop and refine estimates of containment feasibility. Such estimates will aid decision-making with regard to whether to attempt to reduce weed spread and assist in prioritisation of different weeds for containment.

Management of the invasive hill raspberry (Rubus niveus) on Santiago Island, Galapagos: Eradication or indefinite control?

The eradication of an invasive plant species can provide substantial ecological and economic benefits by eliminating completely the negative effects of the weed and reducing the high cost of continuing control. A 5-yr program toward the eradication of hill raspberry (Rubus niveus Thunb.) in Santiago Island is evaluated using delimitation and extirpation criteria, as well as assessment of the ecological community response to management techniques. Currently, hill raspberry is located in the humid zone of Santiago island. It is distributed over three main infestations, small patches, and many scattered individuals within an area of approximately 1,000 ha. New infestations are constantly being found; every year, new detections add an area of approximately 175 ha. Adult and juvenile individuals are still found, both beyond and within known infestations. Both plant and seed bank density of hill raspberry decreased over time where infestations were controlled. Species composition in the seed bank and existing vegetation were significantly different between areas under intensive control and adjacent uninvaded forest. After 5 yr of intensive management, delimitation of hill raspberry has not been achieved; new populations are found every year, increasing the infested area that requires management. Off-target effects on native species resulting from control efforts seem to be substantial. Although a vast increase in economic investment would allow intensive searching that might enable all individuals to be found and controlled, the resultant disturbance and off-targets effects could outweigh the conservation benefits of eradication.