Discussion about this post

User's avatar
David Flietner's avatar

Non-native species become invasive as they adapt to a new environment where they don't experience the predator and parasite loads that they face in the environment where they evolved. In the bell-shaped distribution among plants of a certain species, for example, those that allocate fewer resources (such as chemical defenses) to deter herbivores will have more resources to devote to reproduction or outcompeting native rivals. The gene distribution shifts over several generations species and the plants become increasingly prolific. That's why we often see a lag of several decades before a species explodes and becomes a real pest. To date, many invasive species have become major pests along waterways and riparian areas. I'm concerned that the "California friendly" plant species being promoted now will increasingly swamp our upland habitats later in this century, and we will look back and ask, "How could we have been so stupid?" as we do today for Aurndo, pampas grass, and their ilk.

Expand full comment
Melanie Newfield's avatar

I should get into this conversation, as I have thoughts on the subject, many of them. I will add more if I have time.

In New Zealand, we have the example of gorse. It's invasive, it's costly, it's altering native habitats, it's costing farmers millions of dollars, it's one of New Zealand's worst weeds, it's displacing native species, it's encouraging fire, it's allowing native forest to regenerate, it saved an endemic insect from extinction... it's complicated.

That's the thing with many non-native, including invasive, species. Most have good and bad points, with how much good and how much bad depending on what they are, where they are and what the values of the person looking at them are. There are species which I'd call invasive in New Zealand which I believe should only be controlled under very limited circumstances, either because they aren't that harmful or because controlling them harms other things (an example would be Cytisus proliferus). There are species which I believe could be controlled to great benefit and minimal harm almost everywhere they occur in New Zealand, such as rats and possums (one rat species should be preserved on some offshore islands for cultural reasons though). But there are such large areas affected that we can't do it all.

This is why decisions about managing invasive species aren't, or shouldn't be, taken lightly. In my experience, most of the people making decisions about invasive species management get the point about prioritising both which species are controlled and where they are controlled, both because of limited resources and because they need to be sure that they are doing more good than harm. However I think that the scientists sometimes lose the nuance in the debate because they aren't having to make difficult management decisions.

Expand full comment
31 more comments...

No posts