Risk management to prioritise the eradication of new and emerging invasive non-native species

• DOI: 10.1007/s10530-017-1451-z
• Publication Date: 2017-05-15T13:40:00Z
• Authors: Olaf Booy; Aileen C. Mill; Helen E. Roy; Alice Hiley; Niall Moore; Pete Robertson; Simon Baker; Matt Brazier; Mathilde Bue; Richard Bullock; Steve Campbell; Dominic Eyre; Jim Foster; Maggie Hatton-Ellis; Jo Long; Craig Macadam; Camilla Morrison-...; John Mumford; Jonathan Newman; David Parrott; Robin Payne; Trevor Renals; Eoina Rodgers; Mark Spencer; Paul Stebbing; Mike Sutton-Croft; Kevin J. Walker; Alastair Ward; Stan Whittaker; Gabe Wyn
• Keywords: PROTOCOL; 0106 biological sciences; 570; EUROPE; INFORMATION-SYSTEM; Risk analysis; risk analysis; Biodiversity & Conservation; GREAT-BRITAIN; 05 Environmental Sciences; Contingency planning; Environmental Sciences & Ecology; 01 natural sciences; 630; UNCERTAINTIES; Feasibility of eradication; BIOLOGICAL INVASIONS; TOOL; resource management; feasibility of eradication; 14. Life underwater; Science & Technology; Ecology; Resource management; Great Britain; 06 Biological Sciences; 15. Life on land; contingency planning; NNRM; DECISION-SUPPORT SCHEME; ASTERISK; Biodiversity Conservation; BIODIVERSITY; Life Sciences & Biomedicine

Robust tools are needed to prioritise the management of invasive non-native species (INNS). Risk assessment is commonly used INNS, but fails take into account feasibility management. provides a structured evaluation options, has received little attention date. We present risk scheme assess eradicating INNS that can be used, in conjunction with existing schemes, support prioritisation. The Non-Native Management (NNRM) applied any predefined area and taxa. It uses semi-quantitative response confidence scores seven key criteria: Effectiveness, Practicality, Cost, Impact, Acceptability, Window opportunity Likelihood re-invasion. Scores elicited using expert judgement, supported by available evidence, consensus-building methods. NNRM forty-one threaten Great Britain (GB). Thirty-three experts provided scores, overall eradication assessed as 'very high' (8 species), 'high' (6), 'medium' (8), 'low' (10) low' (9). terrestrial was higher than aquatic species. Lotic freshwater marine scored particularly low. Combining identified six established priorities for eradication. A further not yet were on arrival part contingency planning. one first schemes assessments area.