[APWG] Invaders

[Gena Fleming]

Well, Bob, I totally agree.  I don't think declaring war on invasives is the
longterm answer.    I wish there would be more discussion about this.

What I am hearing is people taking exception to small details, or defending
the successes of current practice.  Yes, we are all doing the best we can
with the available funding, materials, agencies, job descriptions, etc., but
we are essentially being called upon to deal with a problem of huge
proportion that is going to require a different way of conceptualizing both
the problem and, consequently, our response.

The war paradigm is all we have been taught in our educational systems with
respect to how to deal with problems, only it's not overtly called "war".
The limits of this paradigm should be more than obvious by now.   The extent
to which this mode of thinking has infiltrated our perceptions and
subconscious, however, should not be underestimated.  For example, are you
sure "targeting" specific ecosystems for protection is the answer?   I
appreciate "protection" of habitat has been suggested over "eradication" of
invasives, but why the targeting of specific, isolated systems?

I am going to suggest that fragmentation is also a vestigial component of
the war paradigm.  This illustrates the pervasiveness of this thought
process on all of us, even when we are trying to rid ourselves of it.

Not only are ecosystems integrated systems within themselves, they are
further integrated into the ecosystem of the planet.  One can not safeguard
an isolated ecosystem at the expense of the whole.  (I don't suspect you'd
disagree,  I'm just trying to drive to emphasize a point)

There is no "thinking outside the box".  All forms of thought are boxes, and
the box "we" (industrialized society) think in is a box of war.  Even when
we think we are defending nature, it tends to get defined in terms of war
(defensive/offensive) or mechanical processes.  Any thoughts "outside the
box" either fall off unassimilated or get assimilated into the war paradigm.

That's why we need a new box.  We need new constructs to visualize the
problem.

That being said, I do think your suggestion of safeguarding sensitive
ecosystems is, in fact,  an excellent idea, as long as we stay mindful of
its place in a larger vision.  We also need to continue on towards a policy
of integral planetary health.  At this point, "restoration" is probably not
an applicable term.  There are too many changes that have taken place, and
too much degradation.

I believe a good term to introduce into our thought processes would be
"transformation".  Nature is not a machine; she holds a healing,
transformative power.  How can we re-envision human technologies and
activity into technologies that respect the laws of nature, instead of
trying to control or "fix" them,  and how can we govern our activites to
have a remedial instead of damaging effect on the planet?

Anyway, thanks for your commentary.

best,

Gena



2008/9/12 Bob Beyfuss <rlb14 at cornell.edu>

> Hi All
> There is no question that globalization has dramatically accelerated the
> spread of invasive species but I really do not see any possibility at all
> of that situation changing in the future. In fact, it is likely to become
> much worse in the next few decades. The question that arises, is how do we
> react?  I don't think that simply declaring "war" on all invasive species
> anywhere they occur and at whatever rate of infestation is the answer. The
> older I get, the less convinced I am that war is the answer for most of our
> problems.  I would prefer a more thoughtful approach targeting protection
> of specific and highly sensitive ecosystems instead of ill advised
> eradication programs that are doomed to failure before they begin. The
> Director of our local Nature Conservancy told me that he could spend 90% of
> his entire budget for the next three years, attempting to eradicate
> roadside garlic mustard with the only certain outcome that he would have to
> start all over again in 3 years. When I see eradication programs conducted
> in highly disturbed urban environments I wonder if the cost justifies the
> temporary results. Ultimately, the disturbances that led to the invasions
> remain and often the results of widespread herbicide applications only
> insure that the problem. Unless the entity that is applying any herbicide
> against invasives can reasonably predict that the outcome of that
> application will result in the desired reestablishment of the plant
> community it is designed to protect, I question the action. In simple
> terms, killing invasive plants simply because "they are there" with no real
> clue as to what will follow, is bad policy.
> Bob
>
>
> At 11:49 AM 9/11/2008, Michael Schenk wrote:
> >Bob, thanks for the article.
> >
> >This article contains an excellent summary of the unprecedented threat of
> >the modern spread of invasive species: the vastly accelerated rate of
> >invasion, coupled with the stress placed on ecosystems by induced rapid
> >changes. Read through to the latter part, past the feel-good stuff about
> >the fossil record. Of course the fossil record doesn't contain anything
> >comparable. There was no highly mobile technological species imposing
> >geological rates of change in decades as opposed to millions of years.
> >
> >Change in species diversity and ranges happens constantly. It's the rate
> >of change which is worrisome. The rate of change from a major asteroid
> >strike, scaled in weeks or years, is more similar to the current rate of
> >change than the megayears we'll find in the fossil record.
> >
> >Mike
> >
> >
> > >Message: 1
> > >Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 14:53:13 -0400
> > >From: Bob Beyfuss <rlb14 at cornell.edu>
> > >Subject: [APWG] Fwd: Friendly Invaders
> > >To: apwg at lists.plantconservation.org
> > >Message-ID:
> > >       <6.2.1.2.2.20080910145256.051d6008 at postoffice8.mail.cornell.edu>
> > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> > >
> > >
> > >>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
> > >>Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:11:52 -0400
> > >>X-PH: V4.1 at granite2
> > >>To: rlb14 at cornell.edu, <jrh45 at cornell.edu>
> > >>From: Gary Goff <grg3 at cornell.edu>
> > >>Subject: Fwd: Friendly Invaders
> > >>X-PMX-Version: 5.3.1.294258, Antispam-Engine: 2.5.1.298604,
> Antispam-Data:
> > >>2008.7.13.8
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
> > >>>Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:57:20 -0400
> > >>>X-PH: V4.1 at granite2
> > >>>X-PH: V4.1 at tulip
> > >>>To: CCE-INVASIVESPECIES-L at cornell.edu
> > >>>From: "Robert J. Kent" <rjk13 at cornell.edu>
> > >>>Subject: Friendly Invaders
> > >>>Cc: Charlie Scheer <cfscheer at optonline.net>
> > >>>X-PMX-Version: 5.3.1.294258, Antispam-Engine: 2.5.1.298604,
> > >>>Antispam-Data: 2008.8.17.85208
> > >>>X-PMX-Version: 5.4.1.325704, Antispam-Engine: 2.6.0.325393,
> > >>>Antispam-Data: 2008.9.9.124319
> > >>>List-Unsubscribe: < mailto:leave-3026195-7370812N at list.cornell.edu>
> > >>>List-Subscribe: < mailto:
> subscribe-cce-invasivespecies-l at list.cornell.edu>
> > >>>List-Owner: < mailto:owner-cce-invasivespecies-l at list.cornell.edu>
> > >>>Reply-To: "Robert J. Kent" <rjk13 at cornell.edu>
> > >>>Sender: bounce-3026195-7370812 at list.cornell.edu
> > >>>X-LYRIS-Message-Id:
> > >>><LYRIS-7370812-3026195-2008.09.09-08.57.30--grg3#cornell.edu
> @list.corne
> > ll.edu>
> > >>>
> > >>>NY Times
> > >>>September 9, 2008
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>Friendly Invaders
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>By
> > <http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=bylL&v1=CARL>>>ZIMMER&fdq=199
> > 60101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=CARL
> > >>>ZIMMER&inline=nyt-per>CARL ZIMMER
> > >>>
> > >>>New Zealand is home to 2,065 native plants found nowhere else on
> Earth.
> > >>>They range from magnificent towering kauri trees to tiny flowers that
> > >>>form tightly packed mounds called vegetable sheep.
> > >>>
> > >>>When Europeans began arriving in New Zealand, they brought with them
> > >>>alien plants ? crops, garden plants and stowaway weeds. Today, 22,000
> > >>>non-native plants grow in New Zealand. Most of them can survive only
> with
> > >>>the loving care of gardeners and farmers. But 2,069 have become
> > >>>naturalized: they have spread out across the islands on their own.
> There
> > >>>are more naturalized invasive plant species in New Zealand than native
> > species.
> > >>>
> > >>>It sounds like the makings of an ecological disaster: an epidemic of
> > >>>invasive species that wipes out the delicate native species in its
> path.
> > >>>But in a paper published in August in The
> > >>><
> http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/p/pr
> >
> oceedings_of_the_national_academy_of_sciences/index.html?inline=nyt-org>Proceedings
> >
> > >>>of the National Academy of Sciences, Dov Sax, an ecologist at
> > >>><
> http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/b/br
> > own_university/index.html?inline=nyt-org>Brown
> > >>>University, and Steven D. Gaines, a marine biologist at the University
> of
> > >>>California, Santa Barbara, point out that the invasion has not led to
> a
> > >>>mass extinction of native plants. The number of documented extinctions
> of
> > >>>native New Zealand plant species is a grand total of three.
> > >>>
> > >>>Exotic species receive lots of attention and create lots of worry.
> Some
> > >>>scientists consider biological invasions among the top two or three
> > >>>forces driving species into extinction. But Dr. Sax, Dr. Gaines and
> > >>>several other researchers argue that attitudes about exotic species
> are
> > >>>too simplistic. While some invasions are indeed devastating, they
> often
> > >>>do not set off extinctions. They can even spur the evolution of new
> > diversity.
> > >>>
> > >>>?I hate the ?exotics are evil? bit, because it?s so unscientific,? Dr.
> > >>>Sax said.
> > >>>
> > >>>Dr. Sax and his colleagues are at odds with many other experts on
> > >>>invasive species. Their critics argue that the speed with which
> species
> > >>>are being moved around the planet, combined with other kinds of stress
> on
> > >>>the environment, is having a major impact.
> > >>>
> > >>>There is little doubt that some invasive species have driven native
> > >>>species extinct. But Dr. Sax argues that they are far more likely to
> be
> > >>>predators than competitors.
> > >>>
> > >>>In their new paper, Dr. Sax and Dr. Gaines analyze all of the
> documented
> > >>>extinctions of vertebrates that have been linked to invasive species.
> > >>>Four-fifths of those extinctions were because of introduced predators
> > >>>like foxes, cats and rats. The Nile perch was introduced into Lake
> > >>>Victoria in 1954 for food. It then began wiping out native fish by
> > eating them.
> > >>>
> > >>>?If you can eat something, you can eat it everywhere it lives,? Dr.
> Sax
> > >>>said.
> > >>>
> > >>>But Dr. Sax and Dr. Gaines argue that competition from exotic species
> > >>>shows little sign of causing extinctions. This finding is at odds with
> > >>>traditional concepts of ecology, Dr. Sax said. Ecosystems have often
> been
> > >>>seen as having a certain number of niches that species can occupy.
> Once
> > >>>an ecosystem?s niches are full, new species can take them over only if
> > >>>old species become extinct.
> > >>>
> > >>>But as real ecosystems take on exotic species, they do not show any
> sign
> > >>>of being saturated, Dr. Sax said. In their paper, Dr. Sax and Dr.
> Gaines
> > >>>analyze the rise of exotic species on six islands and island chains.
> > >>>Invasive plants have become naturalized at a steady pace over the last
> > >>>two centuries, with no sign of slowing down. In fact, the total
> diversity
> > >>>of these islands has doubled.
> > >>>
> > >>>Fish also show this pattern, said James Brown of the
> > >>><
> http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/u/un
> > iversity_of_new_mexico/index.html?inline=nyt-org>University
> > >>>of New Mexico. He said that whenever he visits a river where exotic
> fish
> > >>>have been introduced, ?I ask, ?Have you seen any extinctions of the
> > >>>natives?? ? ?The first response you get is, ?Not yet,? as if the
> > >>>extinction of the natives is an inevitable consequence. There?s this
> > >>>article of faith that the net effect is negative.?
> > >>>
> > >>>Dr. Brown does not think that faith is warranted. In Hawaii, for
> example,
> > >>>40 new species of freshwater fish have become established, and the 5
> > >>>native species are still present. Dr. Brown and his colleagues
> > >>>acknowledge that invasive species can push native species out of much
> of
> > >>>their original habitat. But they argue that native species are not
> > >>>becoming extinct, because they compete better than the invasive
> species
> > >>>in certain refuges.
> > >>>
> > >>>These scientists also point out that exotics can actually spur the
> > >>>evolution of new diversity. A North American plant called saltmarsh
> > >>>cordgrass was introduced into England in the 19th century, where it
> > >>>interbred with the native small cordgrass. Their hybrid offspring
> could
> > >>>not reproduce with either original species, producing a new species
> > >>>called common cordgrass.
> > >>>
> > >>>Long before humans moved plants around, many plants hybridized into
> new
> > >>>species by this process. ?Something like a third of the plant species
> you
> > >>>see around you formed that way,? Dr. Sax said.
> > >>>
> > >>>Biological invasions also set off bursts of natural selection. House
> > >>>sparrows, for example, have moved to North America from Europe and
> have
> > >>>spread across the whole continent. ?Natural selection will start to
> > >>>change them,? Dr. Sax said. ?If you give that process enough time,
> they
> > >>>will become new species.?
> > >>>
> > >>>?The natives themselves are also likely to adapt,? Dr. Sax added. Some
> of
> > >>>the fastest rates of evolution ever documented have taken place in
> native
> > >>>species adapting to exotics. Some populations of soapberry bugs in
> > >>>Florida, for example, have shifted from feeding on a native plant, the
> > >>>balloon vine, to the goldenrain tree, introduced from Asia by
> landscapers
> > >>>in the 1950s. In five decades, the smaller goldenrain seeds have
> driven
> > >>>the evolution of smaller mouthparts in the bugs, along with a host of
> > >>>other changes.
> > >>>
> > >>>In Australia, the introduction of cane toads in the 1930s has also
> > >>>spurred evolution in native animals. ?Now that you have cane toads in
> > >>>Australia, there?s a strong advantage for snakes that can eat them,?
> said
> > >>>Mark Vellend, of the University of British Columbia. Cane toads are
> > >>>protected by powerful toxins in their skin that can kill predators
> that
> > >>>try to eat them. But in parts of the country where the toads now live,
> > >>>black snakes are resistant to the toxins in their skin. In the parts
> > >>>where the toad has yet to reach, the snakes are still vulnerable.
> > >>>
> > >>>Dr. Brown argues that huge negative effects of invasions are not
> > >>>documented in the fossil record, either. ?You see over and over and
> over
> > >>>again that this is never the case,? he said. Species have invaded new
> > >>>habitats when passageways between oceans have opened up or when
> > >>>continents have collided.
> > >>>
> > >>>?The overall pattern almost always is that there?s some net increase
> in
> > >>>diversity,? Dr. Brown said. ?That seems to be because these
> communities
> > >>>of species don?t completely fill all the niches. The exotics can fit
> > in there.?
> > >>>
> > >>>In a recent paper in the journal Science, Peter Roopnarine of the
> > >>>California Academy of Sciences and Geerat Vermeij of the University of
> > >>>California, Davis, looked at the history of invasions among species of
> > >>>mollusks, a group that includes mussels, clams and whelks. About 3.5
> > >>>million years ago, the mollusks of the North Pacific staged a major
> > >>>invasion of the North Atlantic. Before then, the Arctic Ocean had
> created
> > >>>a barrier, because the mussels could not survive in the dark,
> > >>>nutrient-poor water under the ice.
> > >>>
> > >>>A period of
> > >>><
> http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/globalwarming/index.
> > html?inline=nyt-classifier>global
> > >>>warming made the Arctic less forbidding. Yet the migration did not
> lead
> > >>>to a significant drop in the diversity of the Atlantic native mussels.
> > >>>Instead, the Atlantic?s diversity rose. Along with the extra exotic
> > >>>species, new species may have arisen through hybridization.
> > >>>
> > >>>The Arctic Ocean is now warming again, this time because of human
> > >>>activity. Computer projections indicate it will become ice-free at
> least
> > >>>part of the year by 2050. Dr. Roopnarine and Dr. Vermeij predicted
> that
> > >>>today?s mollusks would make the same transoceanic journey they did 3.5
> > >>>million years ago. They also expect the invasion to increase, rather
> than
> > >>>decrease, diversity.
> > >>>
> > >>>But critics, including Anthony Ricciardi of
> > >>><
> http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/m/mc
> > gill_university/index.html?inline=nyt-org>McGill
> > >>>University in Montreal, argue that today?s biological invasions are
> > >>>fundamentally different from those of the past.
> > >>>
> > >>>?What?s happening now is a major form of global change,? Dr. Ricciardi
> > >>>said. ?Invasions and extinctions have always been around, but under
> human
> > >>>influence species are being transported faster than ever before and to
> > >>>remote areas they could never reach. You couldn?t get 35 European
> mammals
> > >>>in New Zealand by natural mechanisms. They couldn?t jump from one end
> of
> > >>>the world to another by themselves.?
> > >>>
> > >>>It is estimated that humans move 7,000 species a day. In the process,
> > >>>species are being thrown together in combinations that have never been
> > >>>seen before. ?We?re seeing the assembly of new food webs,? said Phil
> > >>>Cassey of the University of Birmingham in England. Those new
> combinations
> > >>>may allow biological invasions to drive species extinct in unexpected
> > ways.
> > >>>
> > >>><
> http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/disease/botulism/overview.html
> > ?inline=nyt-classifier>Botulism,
> > >>>for example, is killing tens of thousands of birds around the Great
> > >>>Lakes. Studies indicate that two invasive species triggered the
> outbreak.
> > >>>The quagga mussel, introduced from Ukraine, filters the water for
> food,
> > >>>making it clearer. The sunlight that penetrates the lakes allows algae
> to
> > >>>bloom, and dead algae trigger an explosion of oxygen-consuming
> bacteria.
> > >>>As the oxygen level drops, the botulism-causing bacteria can multiply.
> > >>>The quagga mussels take up the bacteria, and they in turn are eaten by
> > >>>another invasive species: a fish known as the round goby. When birds
> eat
> > >>>round gobies, they become infected and die.
> > >>>
> > >>>?If you pour on more species, you don?t just increase the probability
> > >>>that one is going to arrive that?s going to have a high impact,? Dr.
> > >>>Ricciardi said. ?You also get the possibility of some species that
> > >>>triggers a change in the rules of existence.?
> > >>>
> > >>>Dr. Ricciardi argues that biological invasions are different today for
> > >>>another reason: they are occurring as humans are putting other kinds
> of
> > >>>stress on ecosystems. ?Invasions will interact with climate change and
> > >>>habitat loss,? he said. ?. We?re going to see some unanticipated
> > synergies.?
> > >>>
> > >>>Both sides agree, however, that decisions about invasive species
> should
> > >>>be based on more than just a tally of positive and negative effects on
> > >>>diversity. Invasive weeds can make it harder to raise crops and graze
> > >>>livestock, for example. The Asian long-horned beetle is infesting
> forests
> > >>>across the United States and is expected to harm millions of acres of
> > >>>hardwood trees. Zebra mussels have clogged water supply systems in the
> > >>>Midwestern United States. Exotic species can also harm humans? health.
> > >>>?<
> http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/disease/west-nile-virus/overv
> > iew.html?inline=nyt-classifier>
> > >>>West Nile virus,
> > >>><
> http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/disease/the-flu/overview.html?
> > inline=nyt-classifier>influenza
> > >>>? these things are invasions,? Dr. Ricciardi said.
> > >>>
> > >>>On the other hand, some invasive species are quite important. In the
> > >>>United States, many crops are pollinated by honeybees originally
> > >>>introduced from Europe.
> > >>>
> > >>>?It?s not that this is all good or all bad, and I?m not sure science
> > >>>should be the arbiter,? Dr. Brown said. ?Placing values on these
> things
> > >>>is the job of society as a whole.?
> > >>
> >
> >>-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:
> > -:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-
> > >>
> > >>Gary R. Goff
> > >>104 Fernow Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853.
> > >>ph. 607/255-2824;  fax 607/255-2815;  e-mail: grg3 at cornell.edu
> > >>www.cornellmfo.info
> > >>http://www.dnr.cornell.edu/people/ra/profiles/goff.html
> > >-------------- next part --------------
> > >An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > >URL:
> >
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/apwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20080910/d55112de/attachment.html
> >
> > >
> > >------------------------------
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >APWG mailing list
> > >APWG at lists.plantconservation.org
> > >
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantconse
> > rvation.org
> > >
> > >
> > >End of APWG Digest, Vol 60, Issue 3
> > >***********************************
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >PCA's Alien Plant Working Group mailing list
> >APWG at lists.plantconservation.org
> >
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantconservation.org
> >
> >Disclaimer
> >Any requests, advice or opinions posted to this list reflect ONLY the
> >opinion of the individual posting the message.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PCA's Alien Plant Working Group mailing list
> APWG at lists.plantconservation.org
>
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/apwg_lists.plantconservation.org
>
> Disclaimer
> Any requests, advice or opinions posted to this list reflect ONLY the
> opinion of the individual posting the message.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/apwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20080914/7a1f3579/attachment.html>