Search the SPREP Catalogue

While invasive species eradications are at the forefront of biodiversity conservation, ant eradication failures are common. We reviewed ant eradications worldwide to assess the practice and identify knowledge gaps and challenges. We documented 316 eradication campaigns targeting 11 species, with most occurring in Australia covering small areas (b10 ha). Yellow crazy ant was targeted most frequently, while the bigheaded ant has been eradicated most often. Of the eradications with known outcomes, 144 campaigns were successful, totaling approximately 9500 ha, of which 8300 ha were from a single campaign that has since been partially re-invaded. Three active ingredients, often in combination, are most commonly used: fipronil, hydramethylnon, and juvenile hormone mimics. Active ingredient, bait, and method varied considerablywith respect to species targeted,which made assessing factors of eradication success challenging. We did, however, detect effects by active ingredient, number of treatments, and method on eradication success. Implementation costs increased with treatment area, and median costs were high compared to invasive mammal eradications. Ant eradications are in a phase of increased research and development, and a logical next step for practitioners is to develop best practices. A number of research themes that seek to integrate natural history with eradication strategies and methodologies would improve the ability to eradicate ants: increasing natural history and taxonomic knowledge, increasing the efficacy of active ingredients and baits, minimizing and mitigating non-target risks, developing better tools to declare eradication success, and developing alternative eradication methodologies. Invasive ant eradications are rapidly increasing in both size and frequency, and we envisage that eradicating invasive ants will increase in focus in coming decades given the increasing dispersal and subsequent impacts.

Climate change is often referred to as the defining challenge of our time, and it is well known that Pacific Island States are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change. Indeed, these adverse effects are already very tangible for most communities across the region. Coastal features are visibly changing, with rising sea-levels, higher king tides and storm surges, saltwater intrusion and changing weather patterns posing an increasing threat to the livelihoods of Pacific Island communities. The threats are amplified by extreme weather events becoming more intense and more damaging as a result of climate change, with Cyclone Pam recently causing loss of human life and catastrophic damage in Vanuatu, and to a lesser extent in the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu and Kiribati. 2 While communities and governments—assisted by regional, international and nongovernmental organizations—are proactively building resilience and adapting to climate change, there is a real risk of much more severe and damaging impacts materializing in the coming decades.3 The threats are so severe that most, if not all, Pacific Island States face the threat of losing some or all of their habitable territory as a result of climate change, with related risks of the loss of traditional livelihoods and large-scale involuntary displacement

Newsletter on Pacific Libraries

2008 Annual Report for the University of the South Pacific.

Traditionally, Pacific Island people have lived a subsistence lifestyle with taboos and practices that ensured sustainability of resource use. However, modernization with all its implications has reduced the quality of life with problems affecting the very pillars of sustainable development. There are many disadvantages that derive from small size, a narrow range of resources, excessive dependence on international trade, high population density, over use of natural resources, relatively small watersheds, costly infrastructure, fragile ecosystems and high levels of endemism.

Traditionally, Pacific Island people have lived a subsistence lifestyle with taboos and practices that ensured sustainability of resource use. However, modernization with all its implications has reduced the quality of life with problems affecting the very pillars of sustainable development. There are many disadvantages that derive from small size, a narrow range of resources, excessive dependence on international trade, high population density, over use of natural resources, relatively small watersheds, costly infrastructure, fragile ecosystems and high levels of endemism.

This report presents data from the most comprehensive assessment undertaken on differing levels of ecological survey effort employed in Fiji. The four methods examined in order of increasing taxonomic complexity (number of variables or species observed) were FLMMA community monitoring, Reef Check, Akuila Cakacaka's Masters thesis method* and that used by Coral Cay Conservation in Fiji. All of these methods utilise a belt transect underwater visual census methodology with differing lengths of transects though for standardisation, all were set at 20m long by 5m wide by 5m high in this investigation. All methods employed a target species list. Of these target species lists, only the FLMMA methodology observed individuals from all of its target taxa; the other methodologies observed only 67, 70 and 59% of the species included on the target species List for the 'Reef Check method', 'Akuila's method' and the 'Coral Cay method' respectively.