DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Control of Invasive Plants in the Eastern United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Control of Invasive Plants in the Eastern United States Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Biological Control Biological Control of Invasive Plants in the Eastern United States Roy Van Driesche Bernd Blossey Mark Hoddle Suzanne Lyon Richard Reardon Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team—Morgantown, West Virginia United States Forest FHTET-2002-04 Department of Service August 2002 Agriculture BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF INVASIVE PLANTS IN THE EASTERN UNITED STATES BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF INVASIVE PLANTS IN THE EASTERN UNITED STATES Technical Coordinators Roy Van Driesche and Suzanne Lyon Department of Entomology, University of Massachusets, Amherst, MA Bernd Blossey Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Mark Hoddle Department of Entomology, University of California, Riverside, CA Richard Reardon Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team, USDA, Forest Service, Morgantown, WV USDA Forest Service Publication FHTET-2002-04 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank the authors of the individual chap- We would also like to thank the U.S. Depart- ters for their expertise in reviewing and summariz- ment of Agriculture–Forest Service, Forest Health ing the literature and providing current information Technology Enterprise Team, Morgantown, West on biological control of the major invasive plants in Virginia, for providing funding for the preparation the Eastern United States. and printing of this publication. G. Keith Douce, David Moorhead, and Charles Additional copies of this publication can be or- Bargeron of the Bugwood Network, University of dered from the Bulletin Distribution Center, Uni- Georgia (Tifton, Ga.), managed and digitized the pho- versity of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, (413) tographs and illustrations used in this publication and 545-2717; or Mark Hoddle, Department of Entomol- produced the CD-ROM accompanying this book. ogy, University of California at Riverside, (909) 787- All images in the publication are available through 4714, [email protected]; or Bernd Blossey, Dept. Forestry Images (www.forestryimages.org) and of Natural Resources, Cornell University, (607) 255- Invasive.org (www.invasive.org) websites via the 5314, [email protected]; or from Richard Reardon, numbers in the lower right-hand corner of the fig- US Forest Service, Morgantown, West Virginia, (304) ures. The publication is available on the Bugwood 285-1566, [email protected]. website (www.bugwood.org). Additional copies of the CD-ROM can be or- Thanks to Mary Kroll (Kroll Communications, dered from Richard Reardon. Long Prairie, Minn.) for editing and Mark Riffe (Intecs International, Ft. Collins, Colo.) for design and layout. Technical Coordinators • Roy Van Driesche and Suzanne Lyon, Department • Mark Hoddle, Department of Entomology, Uni- of Entomology, University of Massachusetts, versity of California, Riverside, California. Amherst, Massachusetts. • Richard Reardon, Forest Health Technology En- • Bernd Blossey, Biological Control of Non-Indig- terprise Team, USDA Forest Service, enous Plant Species Program, Department of Morgantown, West Virginia. Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. On the cover: Upper photo set: infestation of Pistia stratiotes L. (waterlettuce) on Torry Island in Lake Okeechoee, Florida, before and after introduction of the weevil Neohydronomus affinis Hustache, pictured at right. (Pho- tographs courtesy of USDA, ARS Invasive Plant Research Laboratory.) Lower photo set: infestation of Euphorbia esula L. (leafy spurge) at Forget-Me-Not Lake, Becker Co., Min- nesota, before and after introduction of Aphthona nigriscutis Foudras (flea beetle), pictured at left. (Photographs by Robert Richard, USDA-APHIS-PPQ.) Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 1 SECTION I: WEEDS OF LAKES, PONDS, AND RIVERS .............................................................................. 3 1 ALLIGATORWEED ................................................................................................................................. 5 2 FLOATING FERN (SALVINIA) .............................................................................................................. 17 3 WATER CHESTNUT ............................................................................................................................ 33 4 WATERHYACINTH ............................................................................................................................. 41 5 WATERLETTUCE ................................................................................................................................65 6 EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL ................................................................................................................. 79 7 HYDRILLA ........................................................................................................................................ 91 SECTION II: WEEDS OF WETLANDS ................................................................................................... 115 8 AUSTRALIAN PAPERBARK TREE (MELALEUCA) ................................................................................ 117 9 COMMON REED .............................................................................................................................. 131 10OLD WORLD CLIMBING FERN ......................................................................................................... 139 11 PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE .................................................................................................................... 149 12 JAPANESE KNOTWEED ................................................................................................................... 159 SECTION III: WEEDS OF PRAIRIES AND GRASSLANDS ....................................................................... 167 13 SPOTTED KNAPWEED .................................................................................................................... 169 14 LEAFY SPURGE .............................................................................................................................. 181 15 CYPRESS SPURGE........................................................................................................................... 195 16 SWALLOW-WORTS ........................................................................................................................ 209 17 CANADA THISTLE .......................................................................................................................... 217 18 MUSK THISTLE (NODDING THISTLE) ............................................................................................. 229 19 BULL THISTLE (SPEAR THISTLE) .................................................................................................... 247 20 SLENDERFLOWER THISTLE (WINGED SLENDER OR SEASIDE THISTLE) .............................................. 251 21 PLUMELESS THISTLE (CURLED THISTLE, BRISTLY THISTLE) ............................................................. 255 SECTION IV: WEEDS OF OLD FIELDS AND PASTURES ........................................................................ 263 22 MULTIFLORA ROSE ....................................................................................................................... 265 23 TROPICAL SODA APPLE, WETLAND NIGHTSHADE, AND TURKEY BERRY ......................................... 293 24 BRAZILIAN PEPPERTREE ................................................................................................................. 311 SECTION V: WEEDS OF FORESTS ........................................................................................................ 323 25 KUDZU ......................................................................................................................................... 325 26 MILE-A-MINUTE WEED ................................................................................................................ 331 27 SKUNK VINE ................................................................................................................................. 343 28 COGON GRASS ............................................................................................................................. 353 29 GARLIC MUSTARD ........................................................................................................................ 365 iii Biological Control of Invasive Plants in the Eastern United States SECTION VI: CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................ 373 30 SELECTION OF APPROPRIATE FUTURE TARGET WEEDS FOR BIOLOGICAL CONTROL .......................... 375 Native Weeds vs. Introduced Weeds.................................................................................... 375 Selecting Targets to Minimize Risk to Non-Target Organisms......................................... 376 Selecting Target Weeds to Promote Success ........................................................................ 377 Predicting Successful Biological Control.............................................................................. 378 How Targets Are Selected ...................................................................................................... 379 Future Targets for Biological Control of Weeds.................................................................. 379 References ................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Overcoming the Challenges of Tamarix Management with Diorhabda Carinulata Through the Identification and Application of Semioche
    OVERCOMING THE CHALLENGES OF TAMARIX MANAGEMENT WITH DIORHABDA CARINULATA THROUGH THE IDENTIFICATION AND APPLICATION OF SEMIOCHEMICALS by Alexander Michael Gaffke A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Ecology and Environmental Sciences MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana May 2018 ©COPYRIGHT by Alexander Michael Gaffke 2018 All Rights Reserved ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project would not have been possible without the unconditional support of my family, Mike, Shelly, and Tony Gaffke. I must thank Dr. Roxie Sporleder for opening my world to the joy of reading. Thanks must also be shared with Dr. Allard Cossé, Dr. Robert Bartelt, Dr. Bruce Zilkowshi, Dr. Richard Petroski, Dr. C. Jack Deloach, Dr. Tom Dudley, and Dr. Dan Bean whose previous work with Tamarix and Diorhabda carinulata set the foundations for this research. I must express my sincerest gratitude to my Advisor Dr. David Weaver, and my committee: Dr. Sharlene Sing, Dr. Bob Peterson and Dr. Dan Bean for their guidance throughout this project. To Megan Hofland and Norma Irish, thanks for keeping me sane. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................1 Tamarix ............................................................................................................................1 Taxonomy ................................................................................................................1 Introduction
    [Show full text]
  • Invasive Species: a Challenge to the Environment, Economy, and Society
    Invasive Species: A challenge to the environment, economy, and society 2016 Manitoba Envirothon 2016 MANITOBA ENVIROTHON STUDY GUIDE 2 Acknowledgments The primary author, Manitoba Forestry Association, and Manitoba Envirothon would like to thank all the contributors and editors to the 2016 theme document. Specifically, I would like to thank Robert Gigliotti for all his feedback, editing, and endless support. Thanks to the theme test writing subcommittee, Kyla Maslaniec, Lee Hrenchuk, Amie Peterson, Jennifer Bryson, and Lindsey Andronak, for all their case studies, feedback, editing, and advice. I would like to thank Jacqueline Montieth for her assistance with theme learning objectives and comments on the document. I would like to thank the Ontario Envirothon team (S. Dabrowski, R. Van Zeumeren, J. McFarlane, and J. Shaddock) for the preparation of their document, as it provided a great launch point for the Manitoba and resources on invasive species management. Finally, I would like to thank Barbara Fuller, for all her organization, advice, editing, contributions, and assistance in the preparation of this document. Olwyn Friesen, BSc (hons), MSc PhD Student, University of Otago January 2016 2016 MANITOBA ENVIROTHON STUDY GUIDE 3 Forward to Advisors The 2016 North American Envirothon theme is Invasive Species: A challenge to the environment, economy, and society. Using the key objectives and theme statement provided by the North American Envirothon and the Ontario Envirothon, the Manitoba Envirothon (a core program of Think Trees – Manitoba Forestry Association) developed a set of learning outcomes in the Manitoba context for the theme. This document provides Manitoba Envirothon participants with information on the 2016 theme.
    [Show full text]
  • The Biology of Casmara Subagronoma (Lepidoptera
    insects Article The Biology of Casmara subagronoma (Lepidoptera: Oecophoridae), a Stem-Boring Moth of Rhodomyrtus tomentosa (Myrtaceae): Descriptions of the Previously Unknown Adult Female and Immature Stages, and Its Potential as a Biological Control Candidate Susan A. Wineriter-Wright 1, Melissa C. Smith 1,* , Mark A. Metz 2 , Jeffrey R. Makinson 3 , Bradley T. Brown 3, Matthew F. Purcell 3, Kane L. Barr 4 and Paul D. Pratt 5 1 USDA-ARS Invasive Plant Research Laboratory, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314, USA; [email protected] 2 USDA-ARS Systematic Entomology Lab, Beltsville, MD 20013-7012, USA; [email protected] 3 USDA-ARS Australian Biological Control Laboratory, CSIRO Health and Biosecurity, Dutton Park QLD 4102, Australia; jeff[email protected] (J.R.M.); [email protected] (B.T.B.); [email protected] (M.F.P.) 4 USDA-ARS Center for Medical, Agricultural and Veterinary Entomology, Gainesville, FL 32608, USA; [email protected] 5 USDA-ARS, Western Regional Research Center, Invasive Species and Pollinator Health Research Unit, 800 Buchanan Street, Albany, CA 94710, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-954-475-6549 Received: 27 August 2020; Accepted: 16 September 2020; Published: 23 September 2020 Simple Summary: Rhodomyrtus tomentosa is a perennial woody shrub throughout Southeast Asia. Due to its prolific flower and fruit production, it was introduced into subtropical areas such as Florida and Hawai’i, where it is now naturalized and invasive. In an effort to find sustainable means to control R. tomentosa, a large-scale survey was mounted for biological control organisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Are All Flea Beetles the Same?
    E-1274 Are All Phyllotreata cruciferae Flea Beetles Crucifer Flea Beetle Versus the Same? Leafy Spurge Flea Beetles Denise L. Olson Assistant Professor, Entomology Dept. Janet J. Knodel Extension Crop Protection Specialist, NCREC, NDSU Aphthona lacertosa “FLEA BEETLE” is a common name describing many species of beetles that use their enlarged hind legs to jump quickly when disturbed. The adults feed on the leaves of their host plants. Heavily fed-on leaves have a shot-hole appearance. The larvae (wormlike immature stage) usually feed on the roots of the same host plants as adults. Common flea beetles that occur in North Dakota include the Flea beetles crucifer flea beetle (Phyllotreata cruciferae) and the leafy spurge have enlarged flea beetles (Aphthona species). The crucifer flea beetle is a hind legs that non-native insect pest that accidentally was introduced into they use to jump North America during the 1920s. Phyllotreata cruciferae now quickly when can be found across southern Canada and the northern Great disturbed. Plains states of the United States. The leafy spurge flea beetles are non-native biological control agents and were introduced for spurge control beginning in the mid-1980s. These biological control agents have been released in the south-central prov- inces of Canada and in the Upper Great Plains and Midwest Crucifer flea beetle is states of the United States. Although P. cruciferae and Aphthona an exotic insect pest. species are both known as flea beetles and do look similar, they differ in their description, life cycle and preference of host plants. Leafy spurge flea beetle species are introduced biological control North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota 58105 agents.
    [Show full text]
  • CDA Leafy Spurge Brochure
    Frequently Asked Questions About the Palisade Insectary Mission Statement How do I get Aphthona beetles? You can call the Colorado Department of We are striving to develop new, effective Agriculture Insectary in Palisade at (970) ways to control non-native species of plants 464-7916 or toll free at (866) 324-2963 and and insects that have invaded Colorado. get on the request list. We are doing this through the use of biological controls which are natural, non- When are the insects available? toxic, and environmentally friendly. We collect and distribute adult beetles in June and July. The Leafy Spurge Program In Palisade How long will it take for them to control my leafy spurge? The Insectary has been working on leafy Biological Control You can usually see some damage at the spurge bio-control since 1988. Root feeding point of release the following year, but it flea beetles are readily available for release of typically takes three to ten years to get in early summer. Three other insect species widespread control. have been released and populations are growing with the potential for future Leafy Spurge What else do the beetles feed on? distribution. All of the leafy spurge feeding The beetles will feed on leafy spurge and insects are maintained in field colonies. cypress spurge. They were held in Additional research is underway to explore quarantine and tested to ensure they would the potential use of soilborne plant not feed on other plants before they were pathogens as biocontrol agents. imported and released in North America What makes the best release site? A warm dry location with moderate leafy spurge growth is best.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Aphthona Whitfieldi (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) Populations’ Density on the Growth of Jatropha Curcas in Burkina Faso
    Advances in Entomology, 2017, 5, 127-137 http://www.scirp.org/journal/ae ISSN Online: 2331-2017 ISSN Print: 2331-1991 The Effect of Aphthona whitfieldi (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) Populations’ Density on the Growth of Jatropha curcas in Burkina Faso Alizèta Sawadogo1,2, Souleymane Nacro1,3 1Fasobiocarburant, Léo, Burkina Faso 2Crops department, IDR, Nazi Boni University of Bobo-Dioulasso, Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso 3INERA, CREAF of Kamboinsé, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso How to cite this paper: Sawadogo, A. and Abstract Nacro, S. (2017) The Effect of Aphthona whitfieldi (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) Aphthona whitfieldi Bryant (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) is a major insect Populations’ Density on the Growth of pest of Jatropha curcas L. in Burkina Faso. This study aimed at evaluating the Jatropha curcas in Burkina Faso. Advances effect of the insect pest populations’ density on the growth of the plant. To in Entomology, 5, 127-137. achieve this purpose, 90-day aged single plants were caged in a randomized https://doi.org/10.4236/ae.2017.54013 complete block design experiment with 5 treatments and 5 replicates. The Received: August 8, 2017 treatments consisted of increasing numbers of adults of A. whitfieldi used to Accepted: October 16, 2017 infest the caged plants: T0 (0 adult = check), T1 (100 adults), T2 (200 adults), Published: October 19, 2017 T3 (300 adults), T4 (400 adults). All caged plants were infested 21 days after transplantation and the evaluation started 14 days later one on every 2-week Copyright © 2017 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. basis from September 18, 2014 to February 19, 2015. The growth parameters This work is licensed under the Creative of the plant were assessed.
    [Show full text]
  • Barcoding Chrysomelidae: a Resource for Taxonomy and Biodiversity Conservation in the Mediterranean Region
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 597:Barcoding 27–38 (2016) Chrysomelidae: a resource for taxonomy and biodiversity conservation... 27 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.597.7241 RESEARCH ARTICLE http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Barcoding Chrysomelidae: a resource for taxonomy and biodiversity conservation in the Mediterranean Region Giulia Magoga1,*, Davide Sassi2, Mauro Daccordi3, Carlo Leonardi4, Mostafa Mirzaei5, Renato Regalin6, Giuseppe Lozzia7, Matteo Montagna7,* 1 Via Ronche di Sopra 21, 31046 Oderzo, Italy 2 Centro di Entomologia Alpina–Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy 3 Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona, lungadige Porta Vittoria 9, 37129 Verona, Italy 4 Museo di Storia Naturale di Milano, Corso Venezia 55, 20121 Milano, Italy 5 Department of Plant Protection, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources–University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran 6 Dipartimento di Scienze per gli Alimenti, la Nutrizione e l’Ambiente–Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy 7 Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie e Ambientali–Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy Corresponding authors: Matteo Montagna ([email protected]) Academic editor: J. Santiago-Blay | Received 20 November 2015 | Accepted 30 January 2016 | Published 9 June 2016 http://zoobank.org/4D7CCA18-26C4-47B0-9239-42C5F75E5F42 Citation: Magoga G, Sassi D, Daccordi M, Leonardi C, Mirzaei M, Regalin R, Lozzia G, Montagna M (2016) Barcoding Chrysomelidae: a resource for taxonomy and biodiversity conservation in the Mediterranean Region. In: Jolivet P, Santiago-Blay J, Schmitt M (Eds) Research on Chrysomelidae 6. ZooKeys 597: 27–38. doi: 10.3897/ zookeys.597.7241 Abstract The Mediterranean Region is one of the world’s biodiversity hot-spots, which is also characterized by high level of endemism.
    [Show full text]
  • Arcola Malloi (Pastrana): Alligatorweed Stem Borer Moth Lepidoptera: Pyralidae Current Rating: Q Proposed Rating: D
    California Pest Rating Proposal Arcola malloi (Pastrana): Alligatorweed stem borer moth Lepidoptera: Pyralidae Current Rating: Q Proposed Rating: D Comment Period: 09/27/2019 through 11/11/2019 Initiating Event: An application was submitted for the purpose of releasing A. malloi in California for the control of alligatorweed. History & Status: Background: Arcola malloi, previously known as Vogtia malloi, is native to South America. It was released as a biological agent to control alligatorweed in the United States in the 1970s and in California in 1976. It is now established in the southeastern United States. The adult moth has a wingspan of approximately 30 mm. The female lays eggs on leaves and newly-hatched larvae tunnel into the stems. (Buckingham, 1996). Pupation occurs inside the plant. Arcola malloi attack aquatic and terrestrial alligatorweed stems, which turn yellow and die, and heavily damaged mats eventually rot and sink (Brown and Spencer, 1973). Field observations of 51 species of plants in the native habitat of A. malloi in Argentina, including seven species of Amaranthaceae (besides A. philoxeroides) and 26 species of Chenopodiaceae, did not reveal feeding damage by A. malloi on any except A. philoxeroides (Maddox and Hennessey, 1970). The host range of A. malloi was studied by Maddox and Hennessey (1970). They tested the ability of this moth to feed on 30 species of plants in six families. Full development was restricted to the tribe Gomphrenae, although there was moderate feeding on other Amaranthaceae and two species of Chenopodiaceae. In South America, A. malloi was reared from Alternanthera hassleriana and possibly Philoxerus portulacoides (Maddox and Hennessey, 1970), and it was found to develop on Blutaparon vermiculare in the southeastern United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Alligatorweed Scientific Name: Alternanthera Philoxeroides Order
    Common Name: Alligatorweed Scientific Name: Alternanthera philoxeroides Order: Caryophyllales Family: Amaranthaceae Wetland Plant Status: Obligatory Ecology & Description The stems of alligatorweed are long (up to 4 ft), hollow, and branched to allow the plant to float. The leaves are opposite, elongated, and elliptical with smooth edges. Leaves have a defined midrib with small pinnate veins. The plant produces a small cluster of white flowers during the warm parts of the year. The flowers are fragrant and consist of 6-10 florets and produce one small seed. Habitat The plant roots in shallow water (less than 6 ½ ft) and then begins to grow out from the anchor. This can be problematic as it can choke off entire waterways. The plant grows in segments and can grow roots or stems out of the nodes that separate each segmented piece. Distribution In the United States, alligatorweed is found from the southern marshes of Virginia to southern Florida and westward to Texas and is found in some parts of California. Native/Invasive Status Alligatorweed is a perennial non-native species of plant from South America that was accidentally introduced in the state of Florida. It is considered invasive in the United States, New Zealand, China, Australia, and Thailand. Alligatorweed is also considered to be a noxious plant because it disrupts water flow and aeration when it becomes thick. In times of high rain fall it can lead to flooding due to its clogging of the waterways. Wildlife Uses Mats of alligatorweed can be good habitat for many aquatic invertebrates and small fish that may serve as a food source for wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • Recerca I Territori V12 B (002)(1).Pdf
    Butterfly and moths in l’Empordà and their response to global change Recerca i territori Volume 12 NUMBER 12 / SEPTEMBER 2020 Edition Graphic design Càtedra d’Ecosistemes Litorals Mediterranis Mostra Comunicació Parc Natural del Montgrí, les Illes Medes i el Baix Ter Museu de la Mediterrània Printing Gràfiques Agustí Coordinadors of the volume Constantí Stefanescu, Tristan Lafranchis ISSN: 2013-5939 Dipòsit legal: GI 896-2020 “Recerca i Territori” Collection Coordinator Printed on recycled paper Cyclus print Xavier Quintana With the support of: Summary Foreword ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Xavier Quintana Butterflies of the Montgrí-Baix Ter region ................................................................................................................. 11 Tristan Lafranchis Moths of the Montgrí-Baix Ter region ............................................................................................................................31 Tristan Lafranchis The dispersion of Lepidoptera in the Montgrí-Baix Ter region ...........................................................51 Tristan Lafranchis Three decades of butterfly monitoring at El Cortalet ...................................................................................69 (Aiguamolls de l’Empordà Natural Park) Constantí Stefanescu Effects of abandonment and restoration in Mediterranean meadows .......................................87
    [Show full text]
  • When Misconceptions Impede Best Practices: Evidence Supports Biological Control of Invasive Phragmites
    Biol Invasions https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-019-02166-8 (0123456789().,-volV)( 0123456789().,-volV) PERSPECTIVES AND PARADIGMS When misconceptions impede best practices: evidence supports biological control of invasive Phragmites Bernd Blossey . Stacy B. Endriss . Richard Casagrande . Patrick Ha¨fliger . Hariet Hinz . Andrea Da´valos . Carrie Brown-Lima . Lisa Tewksbury . Robert S. Bourchier Received: 9 July 2019 / Accepted: 26 November 2019 Ó The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Development of a biological control pro- the risks invasive Phragmites represent to North gram for invasive Phagmites australis australis in American habitats. But to protect those habitats and North America required 20 years of careful research, the species, including P. australis americanus,we and consideration of management alternatives. A come to a different decision regarding biological recent paper by Kiviat et al. (Biol Invasions control. Current management techniques have not 21:2529–2541, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530- been able to reverse the invasiveness of P. australis 019-02014-9) articulates opposition to this biocontrol australis, threats to native rare and endangered species program and questions the ethics and thoroughness of continue, and large-scale herbicide campaigns are not the researchers. Here we address inaccuracies and only costly, but also represent threats to non-target misleading statements presented in Kiviat et al. species. We see implementation of biocontrol as the (2019), followed by a brief overview of why biological best hope for managing one of the most problematic control targeting Phragmites in North America can be invasive plants in North America. After extensive implemented safely with little risk to native species.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan: US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area, El Paso County, CO
    Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area August 2015 CNHP’s mission is to preserve the natural diversity of life by contributing the essential scientific foundation that leads to lasting conservation of Colorado's biological wealth. Colorado Natural Heritage Program Warner College of Natural Resources Colorado State University 1475 Campus Delivery Fort Collins, CO 80523 (970) 491-7331 Report Prepared for: United States Air Force Academy Department of Natural Resources Recommended Citation: Smith, P., S. S. Panjabi, and J. Handwerk. 2015. Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan: US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area, El Paso County, CO. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. Front Cover: Documenting weeds at the US Air Force Academy. Photos courtesy of the Colorado Natural Heritage Program © Integrated Noxious Weed Management Plan US Air Force Academy and Farish Recreation Area El Paso County, CO Pam Smith, Susan Spackman Panjabi, and Jill Handwerk Colorado Natural Heritage Program Warner College of Natural Resources Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 August 2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Various federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, orders, and policies require land managers to control noxious weeds. The purpose of this plan is to provide a guide to manage, in the most efficient and effective manner, the noxious weeds on the US Air Force Academy (Academy) and Farish Recreation Area (Farish) over the next 10 years (through 2025), in accordance with their respective integrated natural resources management plans. This plan pertains to the “natural” portions of the Academy and excludes highly developed areas, such as around buildings, recreation fields, and lawns.
    [Show full text]