Search the SPREP Catalogue

Monitoring provides important evidence to evaluate if invasive mammal eradications on islands achieved conservation goals and to inform future allocation of conservation funds. However, monitoring can be costly, and compete with management actions for resources, so it is important that efforts are targeted. It can be difficult to obtain results of monitoring from previous projects, which puts future projects at a disadvantage when projecting possible conservation outcomes. In this short paper we discuss practical considerations for designing monitoring associated with an eradication programme. We focus on the ecological outcomes of invasive species eradication, as opposed to speci?cally monitoring if an eradication was successful or not. We identify major motivations for undertaking monitoring and present a decision tree intended to improve the efficiency of monitoring by supporting project managers determining when and what to monitor, and how to incorporate monitoring into project planning.

In 2012 a process was initiated to produce a guidance document for invasive species management on islands, as an objective of a regional invasive species project in the Western Indian Ocean (WIO) islands, implemented by IUCN. The consultative process for producing the document began with requests and discussions via regional and global island and invasives email distribution lists. Initial responses revealed a consensus on the need for a guidance document for programmatic planning. A draft was therefore constructed around existing Pacific regional guidelines and a draft manual that had initially been written for the WIO, with new supplementary sections suggested by respondents. The new draft was discussed and revised in workshops at two international conferences. The document is now organised into three main sections: the first on how to use it, the second a checklist of the essential components of a comprehensive island invasives programme (to ensure nothing is overlooked when planning), and the third providing detailed guidance on the planning and decision-making processes. The document is intended to provide a comprehensive framework and procedural guide for invasive species planning on islands. Further consultations took place by email, and a later draft was tested by a number of users writing various kinds of invasive species strategy and action plan. Publication will be in English, French (both published 2018) and Spanish (scheduled for 2019).

Invasive alien species represent one of the most significant threats to Arctic ecosystems and their inhabitants. Rapidly changing environmental conditions and a growing interest in resource extraction, settlement and tourism make the Arctic region particularly vulnerable to biological invasion. For this reason, invasive alien species are of substantial concern to the Arctic Council, a multi-national body comprised of Canada, the Kingdom of Denmark (including Greenland and the Faroe Islands), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United States, as well as six international organisations that represent Arctic indigenous peoples as Permanent Participants. The Arctic Council’s Arctic Invasive Alien Species (ARIAS) Strategy and Action Plan includes the priority to: “actively facilitate the eradication of invasive alien species from island ecosystems throughout the Arctic, as well as the recovery of native island species and habitats that have been impacted by invasive alien species.” A multi-national team of governmental and non-government partners is collaborating in the development of an action plan (hereafter ‘islands plan’) for the eradication of invasive alien species from Arctic island ecosystems. The intent of the plan is to provide a vision and strategy for a region-wide approach to the eradication of island invasive alien species as a multi-national commitment. The islands plan will set forth a strategy for prioritising island eradications consistent with the growing pressures on ecological and cultural systems. We have a unique opportunity in the Arctic to take decisive action to prevent and mitigate the adverse impacts of invasive alien species that plague much of the rest of the world. The eradication of invasive alien species from islands in other parts of the world provides useful insights into best practices, including approaches to prioritisation and cost-effectiveness.

Recent years have seen large increases in the number and size of successful invasive species eradications from islands. There is also a long history of large scale removals on larger land-masses. These programmes for mammals and terrestrial plants follow the same cost-area relationship although spanning 10 orders of magnitude in scale. Eradication can be readily defined in island situations but can be more complex on larger land-masses where uncertainties defining the extent of a population, multiple population centres on the same land-mass and ongoing risks of immigration are commonplace. The term ‘complete removal’ is proposed to describe removal from an area with ongoing eff ort to maintain the area as clear, as features in many larger scale mainland programmes. Examples of complete removal to a boundary, in patches and in habitat islands are discussed. While island eradications continue to grow in scale, new legislation such as the lists of Species of European Union Concern will also drive increasing management on larger land-masses. However, these lists include large numbers of species that are already widespread. Methods are needed to prioritise species to reflect both the risks posed and the feasibility of management, including the effects of scale on cost and effectiveness.

The inhabited Isles of Scilly, 45 km off the south-western tip of the UK, are home to 13 seabird species including European storm petrel (Hydrobates pelagicus) and Manx shearwater (Puffinus puffinus), for which the UK has a global responsibility. Between 1983 and 2006, the overall seabird population in Scilly declined by c.25%. This decline triggered the establishment of the Isles of Scilly Seabird Recovery Project, a partnership with the aims to reverse seabird decline and engage the local community and visitors in conserving Scilly’s seabird heritage. The eradication of brown rats (Rattus norvegicus) from St Agnes and Gugh represented the result of over a decade of preparatory work, involving raising awareness and gaining 100% support from the community. The two islands are home to 85 people. Therefore additional, and somewhat unusual, preparations were required (including clearing sheds, communicating with school children and taking precautions to ensure the safety of pets) during the ground-based baiting operation. In 2016 St Agnes and Gugh were officially declared ‘rat-free’, meaning worldwide this is one of the largest community-based eradications to have been successful. Biosecurity on inhabited islands is complex, so to ensure the project’s sustainability, eff orts have been community-led. The community has taken ownership of protecting its seabirds, with 100% saying rat removal and the subsequent increase in seabirds has had, or will have, a positive effect on ecotourism, a key source of income for the islands. No less than 68% of the community said their businesses have directly benefited. This project represents a case study for other community-based projects, showcasing how eradications can gain community support and benefit both wildlife and human populations.

Invasive species, particularly animals, are being eradicated from islands at ever more ambitious scales. In order to protect island biodiversity and the essential ecosystem functions that it provides, however, plant invasions should be given more management attention. While many advances have been made, plant eradication is inherently more difficult than animal eradication due to persistent seed banks, and eradication may not be possible for more extensive populations. While maintenance control has been successful, critics question the sustainability and priority of these efforts, and targets vary widely. Developing consistent and informed targets requires an understanding of how biodiversity varies with invader cover, yet little is known about this topic. Our research suggests that limited control efforts may be highly beneficial. We conducted a meta-analysis of 54 studies to investigate the effects of plant invasions on invertebrate diversity, incorporating invader cover and residence time as potential causal mechanisms. We also contrasted restored plots with otherwise native plots. We found that invertebrate species richness was 31% lower in exotic plots than in native plots, and that there is a threshold at around 70% invader cover after which the negative effects are significant across all studies. Furthermore, these negative effects tended to decrease with time, and invertebrate richness was even greater in restored plots. The implication is that by removing 30% or less of invasive plant cover and restoring natives, we can achieve many of our conservation goals. We argue that by maintaining invasive patches at or below 70% exotic cover at a site in the near term, we can buy time for both the islands’ insect herbivores to adapt to use the invader, and for managers to continue improving plant eradication technologies. By retaining native diversity in this way, we can help to increase the resistance and resilience of these systems to global change and other stressors.

Indicators for tracking conservation efforts at a global scale are rare but important tools for understanding trends and measuring progress towards global conservation targets. Eradication of invasive species from islands is an increasingly used conservation intervention in countries and territories around the world. With a goal of collating these efforts, the Database of Islands and Invasive Species Eradications (DIISE) holds records of the location, target species, year and outcome of invasive mammal and bird eradications on islands from around the world. The database is publicly available in Spanish and English, at , and represents a partnership between the University of California at Santa Cruz, University of Auckland, IUCN Invasive Species Specialist Group, Landcare Research and Island Conservation. The database holds records for more than 1,200 eradication attempts. This database will continue to be added to and evolve as new opportunities for its application arise; thus, we expect these numbers to change over time as new events are added and knowledge about existing events improves.

Eradication of invasive vertebrates on islands has proven to be one of the most effective returns on investment for biodiversity conservation. To recover populations of the critically endangered Polynesian ground dove (Gallicolumba erythroptera), the endangered white-throated storm-petrel (Nesofregetta fuliginosa), the endangered Tuamotu sandpiper (Prosobonia cancellata) as well as other native plant and animal species, a project was undertaken to eradicate five species of invasive alien vertebrates: Pacific rat (Rattus exulans), ship rat (R. rattus), feral cat (Felis catus), rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) and goat (Capra hircus), on six islands spanning 320 km of open ocean in the Tuamotu and Gambier Archipelagos of French Polynesia. Using a ship to deliver supplies and equipment, a helicopter for offloading and bait application, and ground teams for follow up trapping and hunting, invasive vertebrates were successfully removed from five of the six islands. Pacific rats survived at one site. The project was planned and executed by a partnership consisting of international and local conservation NGO’s, working together with local communities. Combining the different eradication operations into one expedition added complexity to project planning and implementation and increased the risk of the operation failing on any one island but generated greater returns on investment allowing six islands to be targeted at significantly less cost than if each island had been completed individually. An extensive and thorough planning effort, effective relationships with local stakeholders and communities, a good operational strategy and a partnership of stakeholders that each brought complementary capacities to the project contributed to its success.

The control of invasive species would be enhanced through the addition of novel, more effective and sustainable pest management methods. One control option yet to be trialled in the field is to deploy transgene-based ‘Gene Drives’: technologies which force the inheritance of a genetic construct through the gene pool of a wild population, suppressing it or replacing it with a less harmful form. There is considerable interest in applying gene drives to currently intractable invasives across a broad taxonomic range. However, not all species will make efficient or safe targets for these technologies. Additionally, the safety and efficacy of these systems will vary according to where they are deployed, the specific molecular design chosen, and how these factors interact with the ecology of the target pest. Given the transformative but also controversial nature of gene drives, it is imperative that their first field trials are able to successfully demonstrate that they can be used safely and efficiently. Here, we discuss how to maximise the probability of this outcome through considering three important questions: What types of invasive species should we use to trial gene drives? Where should we be trialling them? and How should these trials be conducted? In particular, we focus on the ecological, genetic and geographic features of small, isolated islands which make them ideal locations for these initial trials. A case study of an island invasive that is deemed highly appropriate for gene drive intervention, and for which gene drive development is currently underway (Mus musculus), is used to further explore these concepts

Invasive snakes can lead to the rapid extinction of endemic vertebrates on insular ecosystems, usually because snakes are an efficient and novel predator. There have been no successful (i.e. complete) eradications to date of invasive snakes on islands. In this study we assess a novel invasion on Gran Canaria in the Canary Islands. The invader, the California king snake (Lampropeltis californiae), arrived from California via several generations in the pet trade. King snakes are captive bred for various phenotypes, and first were detected in the wild on Gran Canaria in the 1990s. Because very little natural history data exist from within their native range, we focused on developing datasets from native habitats to compare with similar data for the introduced snakes in the Canary Islands. We found that most aspects of the snake’s life history have not changed since invasion, except that there appears to be a lower level of juvenile recruitment along with an increase in the length and body mass of adult snakes on Gran Canaria. We identified environmental parameters for when capture/trapping could be completed to reduce eff ort and maximize success. Additionally, we show different trap success on the various life stages of the snakes. Risk assessments could be required prior to permitting pet trade or allowing captive bred snakes into regions where they are not native.