View - ResearchGate

Limits and Potentialities of Eradication as a Tool for Addressing Biological Invasions 395
example, a common legal constraint to eradication is that several national
and supra-national legislations automatically protect alien species, and often
do not explicitly include eradication as a management tool (Shine et al.
2000).
This complex situation causes an unclear repartition of roles and responsibilities
in eradication, and equivocal decision and authorisation processes.
As a result of these legal and organizational constraints, eradications are often
delayed for too long or, in many cases, never even start. For example, an
attempt to eradicate the American grey squirrel from Italy failed also because
of the unclear legal status of alien species under the Italian legal framework,
and the inadequate repartition of responsibilities between the national and
local institutions (Genovesi and Bertolino 2001).
One of the reasons for the successful eradication of C. taxifolia from California
(cf. above) is the extraordinary commitment by all competent authorities
in the invaded area. These formed a contingency body and ensured adequate
powers and funds to the program, thereby enabling a prompt and
effective response to the invasion. Similarly, the eradication of the coypu from
East Anglia was also made possible by the strong commitment and the relevant
resources mobilised by the decision makers.
More generally, eradications should be integrated into national strategies,
and particular attention should be paid to the coordination of all involved
departments and agencies. For example, the many eradications carried out in
New Zealand are also the result of a coordinated policy, with a clear repartition
of roles and authorisation process under the Hazardous Substances and
New Organisms Act of 1996. The successful eradication of over 53 infestations
of 16 weed species in California has also been made possible by the coordinated
policy to prevent and control weeds, formalised in 2005 through the
adoption of a Noxious and Invasive Weed Action Plan (Rejmánek and Pitcairn
2002; Shoenig 2005).
In order to enable the competent agencies to carry out eradications and,
more generally, to mitigate the impacts caused by invasive alien species, state
authorities should review national institutional and legal frameworks, and
develop coherent, comprehensive and consistent policies on biological invasions.
In particular, legal constraints to the application of the necessary mitigation
measures should be removed, legal tools should adopt terminology
consistent with international definitions, and the competent authorities
should be equipped with adequate powers to take the appropriate actions
(Shine et al. 2000; Genovesi and Shine 2004). Establishing a coordination
body, with access to adequate contingency funds, can be a critical element for
resolving the institutional fragmentation of competencies on the different
issues related to eradications.