Invasive-Plant-Removal Frequency—Its Impact on Species Spread and Implications for Further Integration of Forest-Management Practices
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Socioeconomics of Invasive-Species Management
3. Data and Method
3.1. Data Collection
3.1.1. Partition Analysis
3.1.2. Cochran–Armitage Trend Test
3.2. Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel Test
3.3. Odds Ratio
4. Result
4.1. Descriptive Data
4.2. Covariates of Invasive-Plant Removal Regularity
4.3. Predicting Relationships between Regularity in Forest-Management Activities That Are Potential Pathways for Spread of Invasive Species and Having to Regularly Remove Invasive Plants
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Campbell, F.T. Killer pigs, vines, and fungi: Alien species threaten native ecosystems. Endang. Species Tech. Bull. 1994, 19, 3–5. [Google Scholar]
- Forest Services (FS). Invasive Species Program. 2015. Available online: http://www.fs.fed.us/invasivespecies/index.shtml (accessed on 13 June 2017).
- Mooney, H.A.; Cleland, E.E. The evolutionary impact of invasive species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2001, 98, 5446–5451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bruce, K.A.; Cameron, G.N.; Harcombe, P.A. Initiation of a new woodland type on the Texas Coastal Prairie by the Chinese tallow tree (Sapium sebiferum (L.) Roxb.). Bull. Torrey Bot. Club. 1995, 122, 215–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oswalt, C.M.; Oswalt, S.N.; Clatterbuck, W.K. Effects of Microstegium vimineum (Trin.) A. Camus on native woody species density and diversity in a productive mixed-hardwood forest in Tennessee. For. Ecol. Manag. 2007, 242, 727–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costly Invaders. Costly Invaders: The Economic Impact of Invasive Species. 2006. Available online: http://www.jjfnew.com/ViewNews.asp?NewsID=42 (accessed on 26 July 2007).
- Center, T.D.; Frank, J.H.; Dray, F.A. Biological control. In Strangers in Paradise; Simberloff, D., Schmitz, D.C., Brown, T.C., Eds.; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1997; pp. 245–266. [Google Scholar]
- Paini, D.R.; Sheppard, A.W.; Cook, D.C.; De Barro, P.J.; Worner, S.P.; Thomas, M.B. Global threat to agriculture from invasive species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, 7575–7579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hiebert, R.D. Prioritizing invasive plants and planning for management. In Assessment and Management of Plant Invasions; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1997; pp. 195–212. [Google Scholar]
- Epanchin-Niell, R.S.; Liebhold, A.M. Benefits of invasion prevention: Effect of time lags, spread rates, and damage persistence. Ecol. Econ. 2015, 116, 146–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blossey, B. Before, during and after: The need for long-term monitoring in invasive plant species management. Biol. Invasions 1999, 1, 301–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evans, C.W.; Moorhead, D.J.; Bargeron, C.T.; Douce, G.K. Invasive Plant Responses to Silvicultural Practices in the South; BW-2006-03; University of Georgia Bugwood Network: Tifton, GA, USA, 2006; 52p, Available online: http://www.invasive.org/silvicsforinvasives.pdf (accessed on 17 August 2017).
- Miller, J.H.; Manning, S.T.; Enloe, S.F. A management Guide for Invasive Plants in Southern Forests; General Technical Report SRS-131; U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station: Asheville, NC, USA, 2010.
- Olson, L.J. The economics of terrestrial invasive species: A review of the literature. Agric. Resour. Econ. Rev. 2006, 35, 178–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Howle, M.B.; Straka, T.J.; Nespeca, M.C. Family Forest Owners’ Perceptions on Chemical Methods for Invasive Species Control. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 2010, 3, 253–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pimentel, D.; Lach, L.; Zuniga, R.; Morrison, D. Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous species in the United States. BioScience 2000, 50, 53–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aukema, J.E.; Leung, B.; Kovacs, K.; Chivers, C.; Britton, K.O.; Englin, J.; Frankel, S.J.; Haight, R.G.; Holmes, T.P.; Liebhold, A.M.; et al. Economic impacts of non-native forest insects in the continental United States. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e24587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wu, J. Optimal Weed Control under Static and Dynamic Decision Rules. Agric. Econ. 2001, 25, 119–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matta, J.; Alavalapati, J.; Tanner, G. A framework for developing marked-based policies to further biodiversity on non-industrial private forests (NIPF). For. Policy Econ. 2007, 9, 779–788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Odom, D.I.S.; Cacho, O.J.; Sinden, J.A.; Griffith, G.R. Policies for the Management of Weeds in Natural Ecosystems: The Case of Scotch Broom (Cytisus Scoparius, L.) in an Australian National Park. Ecol. Econ. 2003, 44, 119–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Touza, J.; Pérez-Alonso, A.; Chas-Amil, M.L.; Dehnen-Schmutz, K. Explaining the rank order of invasive plants by stakeholder groups. Ecol. Econ. 2014, 105, 330–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lippitt, C.D.; Rogan, J.; Toledano, J.; Sangermano, F.; Eastman, J.R.; Mastro, V.; Sawyer, A. Incorporating anthropogenic variables into a species distribution model to map gypsy moth risk. Ecol. Model. 2008, 210, 339–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mortensen, D.A.; Rauschert, E.S.; Nord, A.N.; Jones, B.P. Forest roads facilitate the spread of invasive plants. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 2009, 2, 191–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Genovesi, P. Eradications of invasive alien species in Europe: A review. Biol. Invasions 2005, 7, 127–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, M.; Freitas, R.; Crespí, A.L.; Hughes, S.J.; Cabral, J.A. Predicting trends of invasive plants richness using local socio-economic data: An application in North Portugal. Environ. Res. 2011, 111, 960–966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Virginia Invasive Species Working Group (VISWG). Twelve Invasive Species of High Concern in Virginia; Department of Conservation and Recreation Virginia Natural Heritage Program, 2015. Available online: http://www.dof.virginia.gov/print/health/pub-VISWG_InvasivesHighConcernVA_2011-06.pdf (accessed on 23 August 2017).
- Dillman, D.A.; Smyth, J.D.; Christian, L.M. Internet, Mail and Mixed Mode Surveys, the Tailored Design Method; John Wiley and Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Agresti, A. An Introduction to Categorical Data Analysis, 2nd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Rayner, J.C.W.; Best, D.J. Unconditional analogues of Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel tests. Aust. N. Z. J. Stat. 2017, 59, 485–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rayner, J.C.W.; Best, D.J. Extensions to the Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel mean scores and correlation tests. J. Stat. Theory Pract. 2018, 12, 561–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shivan, G.C.; Mehmood, S.R. Factors influencing nonindustrial private forest landowners’ policy preference for promoting bioenergy. For. Policy Econ. 2010, 12, 581–588. [Google Scholar]
- Butler, B.J.; Tyrrell, M.; Feinberg, G.; VanManen, S.; Wiseman, L.; Wallinger, S. Understanding and reaching family forest owners: Lessons from social marketing research. J. For. 2007, 105, 348–357. [Google Scholar]
- Gould, A.M.; Gorchov, D.L. Effects of the exotic invasive shrub Lonicera maackii on the survival and fecundity of three species of native annuals. Am. Midl. Nat. 2000, 144, 36–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Epanchin-Niell, R.S.; Hufford, M.B.; Aslan, C.E.; Sexton, J.P.; Port, J.D.; Waring, T.M. Controlling invasive species in complex social landscapes. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 8, 210–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Regularity of Invasive-Plant-Species Removal Rate in the 10 Year Span | Percentage of Total Respondents |
---|---|
Did not and do not plan to remove invasive plant species | 55.87% |
Either removed or plan to remove invasive plant species | 22.91% |
Removed and still plan to remove invasive plant species | 21.23% |
Reference | Alternative | Cochran–Armitage Test Statistic | p Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Forestland acreage | <55 | ≥55 | 2.11 | 0.035 |
Pass land to heirs | 1, 2 | 3, 4, 5 | 2.13 | 0.033 |
Partially cut stand | No | Yes | 4.33 | <0.0001 |
Harvest fuelwood for sale or own use | No | Yes | 4.24 | <0.0001 |
Build or maintain road in the forestland | No | Yes | 2.25 | 0.024 |
Develop a written forest management plan | No | Yes | 3.69 | 0.001 |
Wildlife habitat/fisheries improvement project | No | Yes | 5.58 | <0.0001 |
Gender | Male | Female | −2.23 | 0.026 |
Forest-Management Activity | Odds Ratio | p Value of CMH Test Controlling for | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Type | Regularity | Value | 95% Confidence Interval | Forest Acreage | Written Management Plan | Bequeathing Objective | Gender |
Partially cut stand | Past and Future | 4.48 * | [2.075–9.672] | <0.0001 * | 0.0002 * | 0.0004 * | <0.0001 * |
Past or future | 2.38 | [0.886–6.399] | 0.1511 | 0.1307 | 0.0557 * | 0.0509 * | |
None | 0.25 | [0.106–0.579] | 0.0013 * | 0.0011 * | 0.0012 * | 0.0005 * | |
Harvest fuelwood for sale or own use | Past and Future | 8.33 * | [3.786–18.342] | <0.0001 * | <0.0001 * | <0.0001 * | <0.0001 * |
Past or future | 0.78 | [0.203–2.995] | 0.4115 | 0.5921 | 0.8743 | 0.8286 | |
None | 0.25 * | [0.115–0.546] | 0.0009 * | 0.0003 * | 0.0002 * | 0.0004 * | |
Build or maintain road in the forestland | Past and Future | 2.50 | [1.121–5.577] | 0.0406 | 0.0348 | 0.126 | 0.0215 |
Past or future | 1.26 | [0.512–3.108] | 0.7047 | 0.8385 | 0.7173 | 0.5619 | |
None | 0.54 | [0.265–1.115] | 0.1617 | 0.1431 | 0.2496 | 0.0859 | |
Wildlife habitat/fisheries improvement project | Past and Future | 6.11 | [2.627–14.217] | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 |
Past or future | 1.60 | [0.645–3.952] | 0.3517 | 0.3296 | 0.412 | 0.511 | |
None | 0.33 | [0.154–0.688] | 0.0054 | 0.003 | 0.0087 | 0.0148 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wolde, B.; Lal, P. Invasive-Plant-Removal Frequency—Its Impact on Species Spread and Implications for Further Integration of Forest-Management Practices. Forests 2018, 9, 502. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9080502
Wolde B, Lal P. Invasive-Plant-Removal Frequency—Its Impact on Species Spread and Implications for Further Integration of Forest-Management Practices. Forests. 2018; 9(8):502. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9080502
Chicago/Turabian StyleWolde, Bernabas, and Pankaj Lal. 2018. "Invasive-Plant-Removal Frequency—Its Impact on Species Spread and Implications for Further Integration of Forest-Management Practices" Forests 9, no. 8: 502. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9080502