| Help Notes | |
|---|---|
| Records Page | |
| Number of Records | Three project records can be active at one time. Once a project record is created, summary information is displayed on the records page including type of record (strategy selected), scientific name, steps completed (out of 4), and start/updated dates. |
| Record retention | The IPMDAT data is stored locally in the browser as a file similar to a cookie. DATA WILL BE DELETED IF YOU DELETE YOUR BROWSER'S COOKIES! Up to three IPMDAT records can be saved per browser. To save more than three IPMDAT records can be done by using a second browser to complete a forth through sixth IPMDAT record. |
| Project Background - Page 1 | |
|---|---|
| Scientific Name | Enter scientific name. See USDA Plant Database for additional information (https://plants.usda.gov/java/) |
| Common Name | Enter common name. See USDA Plant Database for additional information (http://plants.usda.gov/java/) |
| Project Scale | Invasive plant management projects are implemented at a variety of spatial scales based on the distribution of the species and goals of the project. Select one of five spatial scales ranging from continental to local based on the goals of the project and area that needs to be surveyed. |
| CISMA/CWMA/PRISM | Cooperative Invasive Species Management Areas (CISMAs) Cooperative Weed Management Areas (CWMAs) Partnerships for Regional Invasive Species Management (PRISM) For more information see: https://www.invasive.org/cismas/ and http://nyis.info/prisms/ for NYS. |
| Project Area Name and Size | Provide a name for the project area. The size of the project area also needs to be determined to complete the IPMDAT. Define the project area boundary based on the invasive plant management project goal(s), which should define the area you intend to protect and/or restore. This includes not only the treatment area, but the area you intend to survey as well. This may be a preserve or park with a few hundred acres or hundreds of thousands of acres, or the entire state or region. Provide the unit of measurement as well. |
| Project Area Description: | Provide a general description of the location and relevant features (i.e. vegetation cover types) in the project area. |
| Property Owner(s): | List the property owner(s) within the project area. If project area size is greater than the local scale, list only the primary property owners. |
| Project State/Province: | Select the state/province(s) containing the project area. |
| Project County: | Select the county(s) containing the project area. |
| Project Coordinates: | Provide the X and Y coordinates for the centroid of the project area. |
| Project Background - Page 2 | |
|---|---|
| Project Goal: | Clearly define the project goal(s) that represent the desired condition of the project area over the long term and state the ultimate conservation/human welfare outcome you hope to achieve. The goal(s) should not only focus on the invasive plant management outcome, but also the benefits that the project would maintain/restore. A well-defined goal islinked to project area, impact oriented, measurable, time limited, and specific. See Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation for more information: https://cmp-openstandards.org/ |
| Project Objectives: | Develop an objective(s) for the management results that you believe are necessary to attain your goals. A well-defined objective is specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time limited (i.e. reduce X invasive plant by X% by XX). |
| Monitoring Plan: | Develop a monitoring plan with sufficient detail to evaluate the success in achieving goals and objectives. See Measuring and Monitoring Plant Populations for more information: http://www.blm.gov/download/file/fid/20450 |
| Restoration Needs: | Document if active restoration is needed and initiate the development of a plan and budget. |
| Start and End Date: | Enter the estimated start and end date of the project and then press the Calculate Duration button to input the time to complete project. This information is required to develop the project budget in the Finical Analysis section of the tool. |
| Is this an ongoing project? | Is this a project that has already been started? If so, please describe the history of the project on the next page. |
| Project Background - Page 3 & 4 | |
|---|---|
| Gross Invaded Area: | Enter the ”gross” area that is more or less infested by the weed. The ”gross” area may contain multiple patches separated by short distances. This field is intended to show the general area of land occupied by a weed species and is defined by drawing a line around the general perimeter of the infestation, not the canopy cover of the weeds. Provide the unit of measurement as well. See Wildland Weeds Article for more information: http://www.fnai.org/pdf/Wildland_Weeds_Article_SP09.pdf |
| Percent Cover | Enter a visual estimate of the percentage of the gross invaded area that is actually covered by the canopy of the weed. |
| Net Invaded Area: | This field is automatically calculated. The ”invaded” area is a subset of the ”gross” area and is the area that actually contains the weed (without the interstitial spaces). The Net Invaded Area is a measurement of the Gross Invaded Area multiplied by the Percent Cover of the weed. |
| Number of Infestations: | Enter the number of infestations within the project area. Separation distance must be defined to determine number of infestations. |
| iMapInvasives Account Name: | If you have an iMapInvasives account, please enter your iMap account name. If you do not have an iMapInvasives account, and your state/province is an iMapInvasives participant, create a free login at https://imapinvasives.natureserve.org/imap/login.jsp. |
| Associated Infestation Management Record ID: | Enter the related iMapInvasives Infestation Management Record, if applicable. |
| Strategy Selection | |
|---|---|
| Rank the Species Impact or Harm (Page 1): | The first step in determining if a control project should proceed is determining if the invasive plant is causing or has the potential to cause significant ecological impact or harm to human health, the economy, or other values. High threat invasive species alter ecosystem processes and/or alter native species composition and/or structure and have the potential to become widespread. An invasive plant control project also may be undertaken if the species has negative impacts on human health, the economy, recreational uses, ecosystem services, legal mandates, and programmatic or other obligations. For additional information on human health and economic impacts review federal and state noxious weed lists and assessments.
The IPMDAT utilizes the “Ecological Impact” section (questions 1.1 – 1.4) of the Invasiveness Ranking System for Non-native Plants of New York to rank ecological impact.
|
| Distribution and Abundance/Strategy Selection (Page 2): | To identify an appropriate management strategy, select the description that best captures the distribution and abundance of the invasive plant within the context of the political, jurisdictional, or ecological project boundary. Comprehensive survey data is required to determine the number of infestations and their size. The tool will recommend a management strategy based on the distribution and abundance of the invasive plant.
The distribution descriptions are grouped by two scales: "Statewide/Regional Initiative" and “Not a Statewide/Regional Initiative”. A "Statewide/Regional Initiative" is defined as a coordinated effort between agencies and organizations to control the invasive species across a state or region.
Project is a “Statewide/Regional Initiative”
|
| Strategy Recommendation (Page 3): | A management strategy based on the distribution and abundance of the invasive plant is displayed. The tool provides an option to proceed with the recommended strategy or choose a different strategy. Select your alternative strategy and document your decision, if you choose a strategy that was not recommended. Strategy recommendations are based on expert opinion and published literature. The size and number of infestations increase control cost and influence the probability of successfully meeting control objectives. See Rejmanek and Pitcairn (2002) and “About” section for a full list of literature. http://www.issg.org/database/species/reference_files/onoaca/rejmanek.pdf |
| Management Strategies (Page 3): | The IPMDAT use the following definitions to identify the general management goals of each strategy. Eradication - The goal of eradication is to eliminate all individuals and the seed bank from an area with low likelihood of needing to address the species in the future. In general, eradication is considered successful when no plants are recovered from the initial infested area for three consecutive years. Eradication is practical only for small-scale infestations, generally in the introduction phase. Containment - The goal of containment is to prevent an infestation which can’t be eliminated from spreading into an un-infested portion of the project area or state/region to protect priority assets. Containment may involve methods that prevent reproduction and dispersal, treating the perimeter of a large infestation, and eliminating small satellite infestations. Containment is most effective with species that spread slowly, move short distances, and for which effective barriers can be established. Containment may be required over the long term. Suppression - The goal of suppression is to reduce an invasive plant population in size, abundance, and/or reproductive output (i.e., density, cover, seed production) below the threshold needed to: 1) maintain a species or ecological process, 2) reduce the harm to human health, or 3) reduce economic impact. Suppression may be required over the long term. |
| Strategy Analysis - Eradication | |
|---|---|
| Agency, organization, and landowner participation (Page 1): | All key agencies, organizations, and/or landowners need to participate throughout the project in a sufficient capacity to meeting the project goal(s). Additionally, all infestations must be subject to management for eradication to be successful. Key agencies and organizations are defined as those providing resources or expertise that are necessary to meet the project goal(s). Key landowners are identified by the project boundary and goal(s). The risk of project failure increases with an increase in the number of landowners involved in the project (See Panetta and Timmins [2004] for more information). |
| Horticultural or agricultural uses (Page2): | An invasive plant must be removed from cultivation for eradication to be successful (See Panetta and Timmins (2004) for more information). |
| Social or political resistance (page3): | Consider the social perception of the control method. For example, in some communities herbicide use is controversial. |
| Preventing Reproductive Escape and Spread (Page 4): | Reproduction must be prevented to limit further spread. Invasive plants with abundant viable seeds or vegetative reproduction in combination with human or long-distance dispersal can spread rapidly. Four factors that affect likelihood of new invasions are: 1) abundant sexual reproduction 2) reproduction through vegetative fragmentation, 3) innate potential for long-distance dispersal, and 4) potential to be spread by humans. Abundant reproduction for purposes of assessing invasiveness potential of non- native plant species is defined by Jordan et al. (2011) as more than 100 viable seeds per plant and if viability is not known, then maximum seed production is reported to be greater than 1000 seeds per plant or extensive vegetative spread is one of the plant’s prime reproductive means. See Panetta and Timmins (2004), Radosevich (2007) and Jordan et al. (2011) for more information. |
| Spread prevention measures and early detection and response program planned (Page 5): | Spread of invasive plant propagules into the state/region or project area must be prevented or greatly reduced to ensure success of eradication. New infestations must be detected early and responded to rapidly. The Center for Invasive Plant Management has identified prevention practices in the Invasive Plant Prevention Guidelines (Clark 2003). The guide contains best management practices to minimize disturbance of desirable vegetation and limit spread of weed seeds. Natural vectors for long-distance dispersal include birds, animal hair, or buoyant fruits. Possible mechanisms of human dispersal include commercial sales, use as forage/revegetation, transport on boats, contaminated compost, and land and vegetation management equipment such as mowers and excavators. In short, invasive plant patches must be eliminated at a rate faster than new occurrences are established. |
| Invasive Plant Detection (Page 6): | Ease of invasive plant detection has often been overlooked as a determining factor in the success of eradication and containment projects. The detection effort is comprised of the resources required to delimit the infested area, find all the individuals for control, and survey for new occurrences. One of the highest resource costs is the size of the infested area that must be searched (i.e. gross area). Over the course of the control project, the density of individuals will decrease, but the original infested area must still be searched. Invasive plant detection can be impeded by the vegetation in which the invasive plant occurs and the characteristics of the plant. For example, it is more difficult to detect a short statured invasive plant in a dense shrubland than in a grassland habitat (See Panetta [2009] and Cacho et al. [2006] for more information). |
| Effective Control Method (Page 7): | The effectiveness of control methods are based on a number of factors. Panetta and Timmins (2004) identified the number of treatments required to kill the largest plants and longevity of seed or vegetative propagules as important factors. Invasive control programs must also consider special procedures that may be required for infestations near sensitive areas (i.e. aquatic herbicide applications). A feasible eradication project must have a control method that can effectively kill the plant and eliminate the seed bank within a reasonable timeframe (i.e. five to ten years). |
| Control Methods(Page 7): | Select and describe the control method(s) that are planned to be used. For more information see Center for Invasive Species Management and Ecosystem Health, Control Methods at: https://www.invasive.org/control/ |
| Permits (Page 8) | Some invasive plant control methods may require special permits (i.e. aquatic herbicide applications, release of biological control agents). |
| Non-target Impacts and Unintended Consequences (Page 9) | Even if an invasive plant species is successfully eradicated, a project can be a failure (or worse) if there are persistent non-target impacts or undesirable consequences. For example, a control effort may: damage non-target, desired species due to trampling or herbicide spray drift, impact water quality, or contaminate the soil. Such non-target impacts could lead to public opposition to future control efforts. |
| Strategy Analysis - Containment | |
|---|---|
| Agency, organization, and landowner participation (Page 1): | All key agencies, organizations, and/or landowners need to participate throughout the project in a sufficient capacity for the containment strategy to be successful. Key agencies and organizations are defined as those providing resources or expertise that are necessary to meet the project goal(s). Key landowners are identified by the project boundary and goal(s). The risk of project failure increases with an increase in the number of landowners involved in the project (See Panetta and Timmins [2004] for more information). |
| Social or political resistance (page 2): | Consider the social perception of the control method. For example, in some communities herbicide use is controversial. |
| Preventing Reproductive Escape and Spread (Page 3): | Reproduction must be prevented to limit further spread. Invasive plants with abundant viable seeds or vegetative reproduction in combination with human or long-distance dispersal can spread rapidly. Four factors that affect likelihood of new invasions are: 1) abundant sexual reproduction 2) reproduction through vegetative fragmentation, 3) innate potential for long-distance dispersal, and 4) potential to be spread by humans. Abundant reproduction for purposes of assessing invasiveness potential of non- native plant species is defined by Jordan et al. (2011) as more than 100 viable seeds per plant and if viability is not known, then maximum seed production is reported to be greater than 1000 seeds per plant or extensive vegetative spread is one of the plant’s prime reproductive means. See Panetta and Timmins (2004), Radosevich (2007) and Jordan et al. (2011) for more information. |
| Spread prevention measures and early detection and response program planned (Page 4): | Spread of invasive plant propagules into the state/region or project area must be prevented or greatly reduced to ensure success of containment. New infestations must be detected early and responded to rapidly. The Center for Invasive Plant Management has identified prevention practices in the Invasive Plant Prevention Guidelines (Clark 2003). The guide contains best management practices to minimize disturbance of desirable vegetation and limit spread of weed seeds. Natural vectors for long-distance dispersal include birds, animal hair, or buoyant fruits. Possible mechanisms of human dispersal include commercial sales, use as forage/revegetation, transport on boats, contaminated compost, and land and vegetation management equipment such as mowers and excavators. In short, invasive plant patches must be eliminated at a rate faster than new occurrences are established. |
| Invasive Plant Detection (Page 5): | Ease of invasive plant detection has often been overlooked as a determining factor in the success of eradication and containment projects. The detection effort is comprised of the resources required to delimit the infested area, find all the individuals for control, and survey for new occurrences. One of the highest resource costs is the size of the infested area that must be searched (i.e. gross area). Over the course of the control project, the density of individuals will decrease, but the original infested area must still be searched for remaining individuals. Invasive plant detection can be impeded by the vegetation in which the invasive plant occurs and the characteristics of the plant. For example, it is more difficult to detect a short statured invasive plant in a dense shrubland than in a grassland habitat (See Panetta [2009] and Cacho et al. [2006] for more information). |
| Effective Control Method (Page 6): | The effectiveness of control methods are based on a number of factors. Panetta and Timmins (2004) identified the number of treatments required to kill the largest plants and longevity of seed or vegetative propagules as important factors. Invasive control programs must also consider special procedures that may be required for infestations near sensitive areas (i.e. aquatic herbicide applications). A feasible containment project must have a control method that can effectively eliminate small satellite infestations (e.g. 0.25 hectare, 0.62 acres) within a reasonable timeframe (i.e. five to ten years). |
| Control Methods (Page 6): | Select and describe the control method(s) that are planned to be use. For more information see Center for Invasive Species Management and Ecosystem Health, Control Methods at: https://www.invasive.org/control/ |
| Permits (Page 7) | Some invasive plant control methods may require special permits (i.e. aquatic herbicide applications, release of biological control agents). |
| Non-target Impacts and Unintended Consequences (Page 8) | Even if an invasive plant species is successfully contained, a project can be a failure (or worse) if there are persistent non-target impacts or undesirable consequences. For example, a control effort may: damage non-target, desired species due to trampling or herbicide spray drift, impact water quality, or contaminate the soil. Such non-target impacts could lead to public opposition to future control efforts. Unintended consequences must also be carefully considered and anticipated when planning any type of control effort. For example, after removing an invasive species, the unoccupied site might be taken over by a different invasive species rather than the desired species. Also problematic is sudden and complete elimination of needed wildlife habitat without any replacement. |
| Strategy Analysis - Suppression | |
|---|---|
| Agency, organization, and landowner participation (Page 1): | All key agencies, organizations, and/or landowners need to participate throughout the project in a sufficient capacity for the suppression strategy to be successful. Key agencies and organizations are defined as those providing resources or expertise necessary to meet the project goal(s). Key landowners are identified by the project boundary and goal(s). The risk of project failure increases with an increase in the number of landowners involved in the project (See Panetta and Timmins [2004] for more information). |
| Social or political resistance (page 2): | Consider the social perception of the control method. For example, in some communities herbicide use is controversial. |
| Effective Control Method (Page 3): | The control methods must effectively reduce an invasive plant population in size, abundance, and/or reproductive output (i.e., density, cover, seed production) below the threshold needed to maintain a species or ecological process (USFWS 2008). Suppression should only be undertaken if there is a clear outcome that can be attained with an effective use of resources. The timeframe of a suppression project may vary depending on the invasive plant and desired conservation outcome. For example, an invasive plant may be suppressed in a restoration effort for a few years in order for planted desired species to establish and become competitive. Suppression may also be justifiable if a new, effective control method is likely to become available in the near future and in the interim, competition pressure on desired species needs to be reduced so that they may persist. Alternatively, an invasive plant may be suppressed over a longer timeframe to maintain a rare species. Since no project is likely to have sufficient resources in perpetuity, eventual cessation of suppression is inevitable. Thus, careful consideration of the value of suppression is needed before undertaking a suppression effort that may have to be implemented for a very long time. Invasive plant suppression by chemical or mechanical means, or by using prescribed fire or grazing, is most likely to be effective only at a local scale. Long-term suppression at a larger scale is likely feasible only with the use of an effective, well-tested, host-specific biological control agent. Suppression at a large scale for a long time without biocontrol is unrealistic, as it would require massive resource inputs over the long term. An example of an effective suppression program is the use of biological control agents to reduce purple loosestrife density to levels low enough for native plant species to increase and persist. |
| Control Methods (Page 3): | Select and describe the control method(s) that are planned to be used. For more information see Center for Invasive Species Management and Ecosystem Health, Control Methods at: https://www.invasive.org/control/ |
| Permits (Page 4): | Some invasive plant control methods may require special permits (i.e. aquatic herbicide applications, release of biological control agents). |
| Non-target Impacts and Unintended Consequences (Page 5): | Even if an invasive plant species is successfully suppressed, a project can be a failure (or worse) if there are persistent non-target impacts or undesirable consequences. For example, a control effort may: damage non-target, desired species due to trampling or herbicide spray drift, impact water quality, or contaminate the soil. Such non-target impacts could lead to public opposition to future control efforts. Unintended consequences must also be carefully considered and anticipated when planning any type of control effort. For example, after removing an invasive species the unoccupied site might be taken over by a different invasive species rather than the desired species. Also problematic is sudden and complete elimination of needed wildlife habitat without any replacement. |