Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
Optimized
monitoring plan
Prioritized
monitoring plan
Increasing
efficiency of the
monitoring plan
Generalized
monitoring plan
Resources allocated to synthesize
data into monitoring plans
Fig. 2.4
Relationship between available species data and the resources applied to synthesize the
data into monitoring plans. Both data and resource investment are required to improve the effi-
ciency of early detection monitoring plans
2.4 What can be Done with Species Lists?
2.4.1 Types of Lists
Species lists provide the fundamental data upon which early detection programs
should be based. Even programs designed to monitor sites (as opposed to searching
for species; see later) benefit tremendously if species lists are used in the program
design. Species lists vary in usefulness depending on their geographic scope, ancil-
lary information, and the time that has passed since they were compiled.
Species lists have been developed for many states or multistate geographic
regions within the United States. Examples from the western United States include
lists for Arizona (AZ-WIPWG 2005), California (Cal-IPC 2006), and Oregon and
Washington (Reichard et al. 1997). Other regions with state lists include Connecticut
(Mehrhoff et al. 2003), Florida (Anonymous 1993; Florida Exotic Pest Plant
Council Plant List Committee 2005), Illinois (Schwegman 1994), Rhode Island
(Gould and Stuckey 1992), Tennessee (Bowen and Shea 1996), and Virginia
(Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation and Virginia Native Plant
Society 2003; Heffernan et al. 2001).
Species lists can also be derived from coarse-scale regional surveys, or from
finer-scale local studies. Regional lists are generally less useful than site-specific
lists for programs focused on local scales, although combining the two can be par-
ticularly useful. For example, a site-specific list can be used to target management
actions for species already occurring within a management unit, and a regional list
