Chapter 10 • Beyond <strong>Inventory</strong>/<strong>Survey</strong> <strong>and</strong> Monitoring: Risk Assessment <strong>and</strong> Managementcan help identify which NIS require the most attention <strong>and</strong>what areas are most at risk to new invasions. The greatestadvantage of NIS risk assessment is that it provides aproactive approach <strong>for</strong> management of NIS. The use of riskassessments allows:• Proactive <strong>and</strong> preventative management, not just reactiveresponse to NIS invasions• Assessment of NIS management priorities <strong>and</strong> costs• Production of maps that assist in the efficiency <strong>and</strong>effectiveness of l<strong>and</strong> management over time• Assessment of large l<strong>and</strong>scapes <strong>for</strong> NIS at a fraction ofthe costs of complete inventory or systematic survey <strong>and</strong>monitoring proceduresHowever, despite their promise, NIS risk assessments areonly in the developmental stage, <strong>and</strong> usable, verified riskassessments are in their infancy. Several conceptual <strong>and</strong>practical challenges, as listed below, must be addressedbe<strong>for</strong>e NIS risk assessments become a reliable tool <strong>for</strong> l<strong>and</strong>managers <strong>and</strong> policy makers:• Assessments need to be general enough to predict risk <strong>for</strong>many NIS, but adaptable enough to change criteria <strong>for</strong>different species.• Resolution of the in<strong>for</strong>mation must be considered: scalestoo coarse <strong>for</strong> application <strong>and</strong> too fine <strong>for</strong> use in detectinginvasions within the l<strong>and</strong>scape are of limited use to l<strong>and</strong>managers.• Biological in<strong>for</strong>mation that is needed to parameterize riskassessments is lacking <strong>for</strong> many NIS. For example, in<strong>for</strong>mationon NIS habitat suitability, long- <strong>and</strong> short-distancedispersal mechanisms, relationships with disturbanceagents, <strong>and</strong> ecological <strong>and</strong> socioeconomic impacts ofinvasion are needed.• GIS coverage on existing vegetation (i.e., not “potential”vegetation) is often absent or not recent, which can haveconsiderable impact on the quality of results.• Risk assessments are most effective when based onin<strong>for</strong>mation from recent, in-depth NIS inventories orsurveys. Such activities can be time consuming <strong>and</strong>expensive <strong>and</strong> are lacking <strong>for</strong> many managed l<strong>and</strong>scapes.However, previous chapters in this book suggest effectiveinventory/survey methods.AcknowledgmentsThis research was sponsored by the USDA Forest ServiceRegion 6, Special Technology Development Program, <strong>and</strong>through a Joint Venture Agreement between Oregon StateUniversity <strong>and</strong> the USDA Forest Service, Pacific NorthwestForest Research Station.ReferencesEndress, B. A. <strong>and</strong> C. G. Parks. 2004. Element Stewardship Abstract (ESA)<strong>for</strong> Potentilla recta L. Sulfur cinquefoil. Wildl<strong>and</strong> Invasive <strong>Species</strong> Team,The Nature Conservancy. http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/esadocs/poterect.html.Mantas, M. 2003. Evaluating Risk to Native <strong>Plant</strong> Communities fromSelected Exotic <strong>Plant</strong> <strong>Species</strong> (draft report). National Fire Plan CohesiveStrategy Team, Northern Region. http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/cohesive_strategy/data/weeds.htm.Rice, P. M. 1999. Sulfur cinquefoil. Pages 382-387 in R. L. Sheley <strong>and</strong> J. K.Petroff, eds. Biology <strong>and</strong> Management of Noxious Rangel<strong>and</strong> Weeds.Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press.Zouhar, K. 2003. Potentilla recta. In Fire Effects In<strong>for</strong>mation System. U.S.Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain ResearchStation, Fire Sciences Laboratory. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/<strong>for</strong>b/potrec/index.html.Many of these challenges can be overcome by additionalwork <strong>and</strong> research. Without doubt, NIS risk assessmentshold great promise <strong>for</strong> enabling l<strong>and</strong> managers to proactivelyaddress NIS problems <strong>and</strong> increase the effectiveness ofprevention, control, eradication, <strong>and</strong> restoration ef<strong>for</strong>ts in anefficient, cost-effective manner.74<strong>Inventory</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Survey</strong> <strong>Methods</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Nonindigenous</strong> <strong>Plant</strong> <strong>Species</strong>
ContributorsContributorsKimberley A. AndersenUtah State UniversityLogan, UTTed AngleUSDI Bureau of L<strong>and</strong> ManagementReno, NVSteven A. DeweyUtah State UniversityLogan, UTBryan A. EndressOregon State UniversityLa Gr<strong>and</strong>e, ORJason KarlThe Nature ConservancyHailey, IDEric M. LaneColorado Department of AgricultureLakewood, COLawrence W. LassUniversity of IdahoMoscow, IDBruce D. MaxwellMontana State UniversityBozeman, MTBridgett J. NaylorUSDA Forest ServicePacific Northwest Research StationLa Gr<strong>and</strong>e, ORCatherine G. ParksUSDA Forest ServicePacific Northwest Research StationLa Gr<strong>and</strong>e, ORMonica L. PokornyMontana State UniversityBozeman, MTMark PorterWallowa ResourcesEnterprise, ORTimothy S. PratherUniversity of IdahoMoscow, IDSteven R. RadosevichOregon State UniversityCorvallis, ORLisa J. RewMontana State UniversityBozeman, MTMaria RyanUniversity of Nevada Cooperative ExtensionLas Vegas, NVM<strong>and</strong>y TuThe Nature ConservancyPortl<strong>and</strong>, ORJohn R. WellsOregon State UniversityCorvallis, ORRobert E. WilsonUniversity of Nevada Cooperative ExtensionEly, NVShana D. WoodMontana State UniversityBozeman, MTContributors may be contacted directly, or through the Center <strong>for</strong> Invasive <strong>Plant</strong> Management, MSU-Bozeman,Bozeman, MT 59717-3120; phone 406-994-6832, e-mail cipm@montana.edu.
Change language