Download Invasive non-native species impact scoring

Invasive non-native species impact scoring - instructions for assessors
Using the access database:
To use the access database copy the file to your computer. When you open the file a form
should automatically pop-up for you to complete.
PLEASE NOTE – if you see a yellow bar behind the pop-up form, like the one in the image
below, you will need to ‘enable content’. To do this minimise the pop-up form, click ‘enable
content’ and then go back to using the main form.
Save your data as you go using the buttons at the bottom of the form. If you need to
review of edit scores you have entered, use the ‘view previously entered species data’
button at the bottom of the screen. This will take you to a new form with your scores which
can be edited.
When you have finished scoring all of your species save the file and send it to Steph
Rorke ([email protected]) and Olaf Booy ([email protected]).
Guidance for scoring is on the next page.
1
Guidance for scoring:
1. Select your species, add your name and the date
Use the pull down menus provided. If you can’t find your species / details contact Olaf
Booy ([email protected]).
2. Score the current impact and confidence
Current impact is defined as the impact to date based on the species current distribution in
GB. Use the predefined categories (minimal concern, minor, moderate, major, massive) to
score your response. Definitions are provided for each category at Annex 1 – please
make sure to use these – a useful decision diagram to help with scoring is also provided at
Annex 2.
Indicate how confident you are using the confidence pull down menu as follows (more
guidance is provided at Annex 3):

High confidence: >80% chance of assessment being correct

Medium confidence: 35-80% chance of assessment being correct

Low confidence: <35% chance of assessment being correct
3. Score maximum impact and confidence
Maximum potential impact is defined as the impact the species would be expected to have
in GB if it were established in all parts that are suitable (i.e. based on current biotic and
abiotic conditions). Response and confidence scores should be determined in the same
way as for current impact.
4. Provide supporting evidence
The type of evidence used to determine the response scores should be recorded,
selecting from the predefined responses. Note that you can select more than one.
A supporting comment to justify the response scores is required, citing evidence where
available. Peer reviewed literature should be used if available, but if not other forms of
evidence is acceptable (e.g. grey literature, field observations). Where no evidence is
available, expert judgement should be used to determine the scores and a reasoned
argument provided as justification.
5. Score the impact type and mechanism
Use this section to score the type of impact (i.e. what is affected) along with the
mechanism for that impact (i.e. how the impact comes about). These scores should be
based on the maximum potential impact (not the current impact).
2
Species of conservation concern. As a guide, a species of conservation concern is
generally defined as one that either has an international or domestic legal designation1 or
that is listed as a ‘biodiversity list species’ by JNCC (i.e. listed on NERC section 41 and 42,
Scottish Biodiversity List or Northern Ireland Priority Species List). For reference, a full list
of these species is provided as a separate spreadsheet.
Habitats of conservation concern follows http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-5706, a full list is
provided at Annex 3. The mechanism of impact is likely to be the same for habitats as it is
for species, but please discuss with your group leads if you are uncertain.
A species or habitat NOT of conservation concern is one that is not covered in either of the
definitions above.
The different mechanisms of impact are defined at Annex 4.
6. List the species and habitats of conservation concern that are affected
If species or habitats of conservation concern are affected please list them here. A pull
down list of species of conservation concern is provided (multiple species can be
selected); however you can also write the name of any species into the text box provided if
this is easier (or a name is missing from the list).
For habitats of conservation concern please select from the list provided (more than one
habitat can be selected and broad habitats can be selected if desirable).
7. Socio-economic impacts
To double check the information already in the NNSIP system, use this box to flag species
that have negative socio-economic consequences.
1
Bern Convention, Birds Directive, Convention on Migratory Species, OSPAR, Habitats Directive; The
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, The Wildlife (Northern Ireland) Order 1985, The Conservation of Habitats
and Species Regulations 2010, The Conservation (Nature Habitats) Regulations (NI) 1995, Protection of
Badgers Act
3
ANNEX 1. EICAT scoring categories
These categories are taken from the “Framework and Guidelines for Implementing the
Proposed IUCN Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa” (EICAT):
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/ddi.12379/asset/supinfo/ddi12379-sup-0001AppendixS1.docx?v=1&s=111344d9f95d9a706cb3e161eb42fddd1d6cefe3.
Minimal Concern (MC)
A taxon is considered to have impacts of Minimal Concern when it is unlikely to have
caused deleterious impacts on the native biota or abiotic environment. Note that all alien
taxa have impacts on the recipient environment at some level, for example by altering
species diversity or community similarity (e.g. biotic homogenisation), and for this reason
there is no category equating to “no impact”. Taxa that have been evaluated under the
EICAT process but for which impacts have not been assessed in any study should not be
classified in this category, but rather should be classified as Data Deficient.
Minor (MN)
A taxon is considered to have Minor impacts when it causes reductions in the fitness of
individuals in the native biota, but no declines in native population sizes, and has no
impacts that would cause it to be classified in a higher impact category.
Moderate (MO)
A taxon is considered to have Moderate impacts when it causes declines in the population
size of native species, but no changes to the structure of communities or to the abiotic or
biotic composition of ecosystems, and has no impacts that would cause it to be classified
in a higher impact category.
Major (MR)
A taxon is considered to have Major impacts when it causes the local or population
extinction of at least one native species, and leads to reversible changes in the structure of
communities and the abiotic or biotic composition of ecosystems, and has no impacts that
cause it to be classified in the MV impact category.
Massive (MV)
A taxon is considered to have Massive impacts when it leads to the replacement and local
extinction of native species, and produces irreversible changes in the structure of
communities and the abiotic or biotic composition of ecosystems. Note that ‘‘local’’ refers
to the typical spatial extent over which the original native communities can be
characterised.
4
A decision diagram showing how to apply these categories is provided on the next page.
5
ANNEX 2. Decision diagram showing how the EICAT categories should be applied
Is the alien taxon likely to have
caused deleterious impacts to the
native biotic or abiotic environment?
YES
NO
MC
NO
Has the alien taxon caused
reductions in the fitness of
individuals in the native biota?
YES
Has the alien taxon caused
declines in the population size of
native species?
NO
MN
YES
Has the alien taxon caused the local or population
extinction of at least one native species, leading to
changes in the structure of communities and the
abiotic or biotic composition of ecosystems?
YES
NO
MO
Are
these
changes
reversible or irreversible if
the alien taxon is removed?
Reversible
MR
Irreversible
MV
6
ANNEX 3. Confidence scoring
Based on http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/ddi.12379/asset/supinfo/ddi12379sup-0001-AppendixS1.docx?v=1&s=111344d9f95d9a706cb3e161eb42fddd1d6cefe3 but
modified using Mumford et al 2011.
Box 2. Scoring confidence
Confidence
Score
High
(>80% chance
of assessment
being correct)
Medium
(35-80%
chance of
assessment
being correct)
Low
(<35% chance
of assessment
being correct)
Examples
There is direct relevant observational evidence to support the
assessment;
and
Impacts are recorded at the typical spatial scale over which original
native communities can be characterized;
and
There are reliable/good quality data sources on impacts of the taxa;
and
The interpretation of data/information is straightforward;
and
Data/information are not controversial or contradictory.
There is some direct observational evidence to support the assessment,
but some information is inferred;
and/or
Impacts are recorded at a spatial scale which may not be relevant to the
scale over which original native communities can be characterized, but
extrapolation or downscaling of the data to relevant scales is considered
reliable, or to embrace little uncertainty;
and/or
The interpretation of the data is to some extent ambiguous or
contradictory.
There is no direct observational evidence to support the assessment, e.g.
only inferred data have been used as supporting evidence;
and/or
Impacts are recorded at a spatial scale which is unlikely to be relevant to
the scale over which original native communities can be characterized,
and extrapolation or downscaling of the data to relevant scales is
considered unreliable or to embrace significant uncertainties.
and/or
Evidence is poor and difficult to interpret, e.g. because it is strongly
ambiguous.
and/or
The information sources are considered to be of low quality or contain
information that is unreliable.
7
ANNEX 4. Habitats of conservation importance
UK BAP broad habitat
Rivers and Streams
Standing Open Waters and Canals
Arable and Horticultural
Boundary and Linear Features
Broadleaved, Mixed and Yew Woodland
Coniferous Woodland
Acid Grassland
Calcareous Grassland
Neutral Grassland
Improved Grassland
Dwarf Shrub Heath
Fen, Marsh and Swamp
Bogs
Montane Habitats
Inland Rock
Supralittoral Rock
Supralittoral Sediment
Littoral Rock
UK BAP priority habitat
Rivers
Oligotrophic and Dystrophic Lakes
Ponds
Mesotrophic Lakes
Eutrophic Standing Waters
Aquifer Fed Naturally Fluctuating Water Bodies
Arable Field Margins
Hedgerows
Traditional Orchards
Wood-Pasture and Parkland
Upland Oakwood
Lowland Beech and Yew Woodland
Upland Mixed Ashwoods
Wet Woodland
Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland
Upland Birchwoods
Native Pine Woodlands
Lowland Dry Acid Grassland
Lowland Calcareous Grassland
Upland Calcareous Grassland
Lowland Meadows
Upland Hay Meadows
Coastal and Floodplain Grazing Marsh
Lowland Heathland
Upland Heathland
Upland Flushes, Fens and Swamps
Purple Moor Grass and Rush Pastures
Lowland Fens
Reedbeds
Lowland Raised Bog
Blanket Bog
Mountain Heaths and Willow Scrub
Inland Rock Outcrop and Scree Habitats
Calaminarian Grasslands
Open Mosaic Habitats on Previously Developed Land
Limestone Pavements
Maritime Cliff and Slopes
Coastal Vegetated Shingle
Machair
Coastal Sand Dunes
Intertidal Chalk
8
Littoral Sediment
Sublittoral Rock
Sublittoral Sediment
Intertidal Underboulder Communities
Sabellaria alveolata reefs
Coastal Saltmarsh
Intertidal Mudflats
Seagrass Beds
Sheltered Muddy Gravels
Peat and Clay Exposures with Piddocks
Subtidal Chalk
Tide-swept Channels
Fragile Sponge and Anthozoan Communities on
Subtidal Rocky Habitats
Esuarine Rocky Habitats
Seamount Communities
Carbonate Mounds
Cold-Water Coral Reefs
Deep-Sea Sponge Communities
Sabellaria spinulosa Reefs
Subtidal Sands and Gravels
Horse Mussel Beds
Mud Habitats in Deep Water
File Shell Beds
Maerl Beds
Serpulid Reefs
Blue Mussel Beds on Sediment
Saline Lagoons
9
ANNEX 5. Definition of impact mechanism

Competition – the alien taxon competes with native taxa for resources (e.g. food,
water, space), leading to deleterious impact on native taxa.

Predation – the alien taxon predates on native taxa, either directly or indirectly (e.g.
via mesopredator release), leading to deleterious impact on native taxa.

Hybridisation – the alien taxon hybridises with native taxa, leading to deleterious
impact on native taxa.

Transmission of disease – the alien taxon transmits diseases to native taxa, leading
to deleterious impact on native taxa.

Parasitism – the alien taxon parasitizes native taxa, leading directly or indirectly
(e.g. through apparent competition) to deleterious impact on native taxa.

Poisoning/toxicity – the alien taxon is toxic, or allergenic by ingestion, inhalation or
contact to wildlife, or allelopathic to plants, leading to deleterious impact on native
taxa.

Bio-fouling – the accumulation of individuals of the alien taxon on wetted surfaces
leads to deleterious impact on native taxa.

Grazing/herbivory/browsing – grazing, herbivory or browsing by the alien taxon
leads to deleterious impact on native plant species.

Chemical, physical or structural impact on ecosystem – the alien taxon causes
changes to either: the chemical, physical, and/or structural biotope characteristics of
the native environment; nutrient and/or water cycling; disturbance regimes; or
natural succession, leading to deleterious impact on native taxa.

Interaction with other alien species – The alien taxon interacts with other alien taxa,
(e.g., through pollination, seed dispersal, habitat modification), facilitating
deleterious impact on native species. These interactions may be included under
other impact mechanisms (e.g., predation, apparent competition) but would not
have resulted in the particular level of impact without an interaction with other alien
species
10