Management

1

• Management
• Control

2

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Types of information utilized
• Ecological impacts

3

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Types of information utilized
• Ecological impacts
• Economic impacts

4

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Types of information utilized
• Ecological impacts
• Economic impacts
• Management constraints

5

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Types of information utilized Ecological,
  economic, management constraints
• How to make decision
• Judgment

6

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Types of information utilized Ecological,
  economic, management constraints
• How to make decision
• Judgment
• Precedence

7

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Types of information utilized Ecological,
  economic, management constraints
• How to make decision
• Judgment
• Precedence
• Formal analysis

8

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Types of information utilized Ecological,
  economic, management constraints
• How to make decision Judgment, precedence,
  formal analysis
• Types of formal tools
• Environmental Assessment (EA/EIS)

9

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Types of information utilized Ecological,
  economic, management constraints
• How to make decision Judgment, precedence,
  formal analysis
• Types of formal tools
• Environmental Assessment (EA/EIS)
• Cost-benefit analysis

10

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Types of information utilized Ecological,
  economic, management constraints
• How to make decision Judgment, precedence,
  formal analysis
• Types of formal tools
• Environmental Assessment (EA/EIS)
• Cost-benefit analysis
• Expert opinion techniques

11

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• Uses primarily numerical rankings

12

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• Uses primarily numerical rankings
• Written in outline format

13

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• Uses primarily numerical rankings
• Written in outline format
• Has 2 main sections of quantitative information
  plus a third qualitative factor

14

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
  Basic structure
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact
• Innate Ability of Species to be a Pest
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL
• Abundance Within Park
• Ease of Control
• Side-Effects of Chemical/Mechanical Control
  Measures
• Effectiveness of Community Management
• Biological Control
• URGENCY

15

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact
• Distribution

16

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact
• Distribution Concern ? as species is found in
  more undisturbed, natural habitats

17

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact
• Distribution
• Abundance Concern ? with ? numbers sizes of
  populations

18

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact
• Distribution
• Abundance
• Effects Concern ? with ? ecological impacts

19

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact
• Distribution
• Abundance
• Effects
• Significance Concern ? as species threaten
  things that are special about the park

20

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact
• Distribution
• Abundance
• Effects
• Significance
• Visuals Concern ? with ? visual impact

21

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact total possible of 50
  points
• Distribution
• Abundance
• Effects
• Significance
• Visuals Concern ? with ? visual impact

22

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact total possible of 50
  points
• Innate Ability of Species to be a Pest
• 15 Reproduction

23

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact total possible of 50
  points
• Innate Ability of Species to be a Pest
• 15 Reproduction
• Ability to complete reproductive cycle Screening
  tool

24

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact total possible of 50
  points
• Innate Ability of Species to be a Pest
• 15 Reproduction
• Ability to complete reproductive cycle
• Mode of reproduction Concern ? with seed
  production, and if both vegetative seed

25

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact total possible of 50
  points
• Innate Ability of Species to be a Pest
• 15 Reproduction
• Ability to complete reproductive cycle
• Mode of reproduction
• 35 How fast an the population grow Concern ?
  with ? ability to reproduce vegetatively or by
  seed

26

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact total possible of 50
  points
• Innate Ability of Species to be a Pest
• 15 Reproduction
• Dispersal Concern ? with ? ability for long
  distance dispersal

27

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact total possible of 50
  points
• Innate Ability of Species to be a Pest
• 15 Reproduction
• Dispersal
• Germination Concern ? with ? ability to
  germinate under variety of conditions and hence
  colonize new sites

28

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact total possible of 50
  points
• Innate Ability of Species to be a Pest
• 15 Reproduction
• Dispersal
• Germination
• Competition Concern ? with ? competitive ability

29

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact total possible of 50
  points
• Innate Ability of Species to be a Pest
• 15 Reproduction
• Dispersal
• Germination
• Competitive ability
• Impact elsewhere Concern ? with known ability to
  have an impact elsewhere

30

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT
• Current Level of Impact total possible of 50
  points
• Innate Ability of Species to be a Pest total
  possible of 50 points
• 15 Reproduction
• Dispersal
• Germination
• Competitive ability
• Impact elsewhere

31

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• Current Level of Impact total possible of 50
  points
• Innate Ability of Species to be a Pest total
  possible of 50 points

32

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL

33

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL
• Abundance Within Park Easier to control as
  number size of populations ?

34

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL
• Abundance
• Ease of Control Easier to control as seed
  viability ?

35

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL
• Abundance
• Ease of Control Easier to control as seed
  viability ? when vegetative regeneration is small

36

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL
• Abundance
• Ease of Control Easier to control as seed
  viability ? when vegetative regeneration is
  small when effort required is small

37

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL
• Abundance
• Ease of Control Easier to control as seed
  viability ? when vegetative regeneration is
  small when effort required is small when
  propagules are not nearby

38

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL
• Abundance
• Ease of Control
• Side-effects Easier to control if dont expect
  more problems to occur from the control
  treatments

39

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL
• Abundance
• Ease of Control
• Side-effects
• Community Management Easier to control if can
  incorporate into day-to day management

40

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL
• Abundance
• Ease of Control
• Side-effects
• Community Management
• Biological Control More desirable to use
  biological control

41

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• Abundance
• Ease of Control
• Side-effects
• Community Management
• Biological Control

42

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

43

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

44

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

45

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

46

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

47

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

48

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

49

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

50

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

51

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

52

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

53

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

High
54

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

Low
High
55

• Management
• Control

• Prioritizing control From Hiebert in Luken
  Thieret (1997)
• Ranking system used by National Park System
• SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT Total possible 100
  points
• FEASIBILITY OF CONTROL Total possible 100
  points
• URGENCY Qualitative (HML)

Low
High