Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
be identified), and what the current status of the population appears to be. In those
rare instances when origin or numbers of individual animals involved in the intro-
duction are known, those data should be included as well. For summaries covering
numerous escaped or released aliens, specifying the times of their discoveries
should be required instead of just giving a broad date range. Of course, not all of
these data will be available for all introductions, and publication should not be pro-
hibited in those instances - the last thing we need is another reason to reject applied
papers. But reporting standards and use of terminology have been remarkably var-
ied throughout the literature surveyed for this study, and attempts to show that each
of these scientifically relevant details were at least considered (if not all liable to
resolution) would work considerably to improve the quality of information availa-
ble to researchers in assessing future trends. A perusal of the database and bibliog-
raphy will make clear the degree to which
Herpetological Review
has filled the
niche in reporting new alien reptile and amphibian populations.
Applied Herpetology
also has a new section devoted to the topic. Adoption of these minimal standards
by those journals would set a precedent that could go some considerable way
toward improving reporting standards throughout the field.
As I have said above, interest in herpetological introductions and invasions has
grown among both researchers and managers in recent years, but this interest has
not yet gelled into focused hypothesis testing, problem solving, or effective man-
agement. A largely new generation of herpetologists is investigating a greater range
of questions and invasive taxa than was the case a mere few years ago. And there
is an increasing number of managers and policy makers who wish to address her-
petological invasions but have been hindered by lack of reliable information and
methodologies. But, with only one or two exceptions (notably, the United States'
brown treesnake program and, perhaps, Australia's cane toad program), the research
and management communities have not greatly intersected or interacted, so fruitful
programs of adaptive management and applied invasive herpetology have not yet
matured. I have tried to show how available information is sufficient to justify a
greater degree of policy attention to these ecological interlopers than has histori-
cally been tendered, and to show as well some of the structural requirements for
effective policies and programs to be developed and implemented. I have also
pointed toward research areas that are in greatest need of attention from a practical,
conservation point of view. Most of these questions also have their own intrinsic
scientific interest, which will be obvious enough to scientists, given their training.
But I have sought to show how such research might best fit into a practical con-
servation paradigm and, thereby, have joint impact in both fields. Management
uninformed by scientific knowledge will likely prove misguided or counter-
productive; research uninformed by management needs will likely remain arcane
or sterile. If the conservation impact of herpetological invasions is to be decreased,
these two communities need to address singly their respective structural, pro-
grammatic, and research gaps and need to work together to better focus their
energies on adaptive problem solving. Otherwise, it is difficult to see what will
prevent the exponential increase of herpetofaunal naturalizations from thoroughly
transforming the communities and ecosystems that we jointly cherish.
