Process followed to produce this status report

The process followed is outlined in figure 1.2, with a detailed description of each step below.

Appointment of status report drafting team

SoURcINg INfoRMATIoN Review and

collate available information

Arrange a scientific symposium and

journal special issue

Identify and engage specialist

contributors

Develop a suite of indicators

Assign values to indicators

Production and review of the first

order draft

Production and review of the second order draft

PReSeNT PRelIMINARy fINDINgS RefeReNce AND ADvISoRy coMMITTee

final status report

Identify stakeholders to

participate in peer review

STAkeHolDeR coNSUlTATIoN

Figure 1.2 Process followed for the production of South Africa’s first National Status Report on Biological Invasions.

The team responsible for writing the report was composed of staff from the south african national biodiversity Institute (SANBI) and the DST-NRF Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology (C•I•B). While activities towards the report commenced in 2015, the drafting team was formally appointed in august 2016, and the official launch of the process was in January 2017 (figure 1.3)

ChaPter 1IinTroduc

Appoint a status report drafting team – as per the nem:ba a&is regulations, the responsibility for compiling the status report lay with the south african national biodiversity institute (sanbi), with provision to involve other stakeholders in the drafting team (box 1.1). given the small size of the team available to conduct this work internal to sanbi, the need to engage with a range of institutions and implementing agencies across the country, and the positon of the DST-NRF Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology (C•I•B) as an established global leader in research on biological invasions (van Wilgen, davies, richardson, 2014), sanbi entered into a collaboration agreement with the C•I•B to produce the report. The SANBI/C•I•B team was responsible for the design of the process, with guidance from a reference and advisory committee.

Reference and Advisory Committee – the project was guided by a reference and advisory committee of six members, drawn from academic institutions and the department of environmental affairs (dea). The role of the committee was to advise on: (1) the scope and content of the report; (2) the process for the production of the report; (3) the broader engagement required to ensure that the report meets its legal obligations, as well as the expectations of stakeholders;

and (4) the sources of information and expertise that could be used to inform the production of the report.

Sourcing Information – the drafting team used three main strategies to obtain information: through the team accessing and collating information themselves; through encouraging experts to contribute a scientific paper to a special issue of a journal; and finally through sending direct requests to domain experts and practitioners for specific inputs.

1. Review and collate available information – the drafting team drew on personal knowledge, and undertook a range of literature searches, to identify relevant information and databases. because the required data were in many cases not available in a readily accessible form, it was also necessary to engage with specialist contributors.

2. Arrange a scientific symposium and journal special issue – to provide an impetus for collating information and to raise awareness of the process, experts were invited to present a paper at a scientific symposium, and an open call for paper proposals on the theme of reporting on biological invasions in south africa was distributed. The symposium was held in may 2016, and manuscripts were subsequently considered for publication in a special issue of the journal Bothalia: African Biodiversity and Conservation (box 1.3; Wilson et al., 2017). The information thus generated has proved essential in compiling this report.

3. Identify and engage specialist contributors – where the first two strategies were not able to provide information, potential contributors with specialist knowledge about aspects of biological invasions and their management were identified within academic institutions, research institutes and science councils, and in national, provincial and local government. specialists were approached and invited to contribute information in a format that would allow values to be assigned to indicators.

Develop a suite of indicators – biological invasions are one of several interacting drivers of global change. however, while there are indicators to assess the impact of the other major drivers (e.g. climate change is measured by essential climate variables; land degradation by the rate of conversion of land), an internationally-agreed system of indicators for biological invasions has not yet been developed (though see latombe et al., 2017). it was therefore necessary to further develop a suite of indicators that could be used for the specific purpose of compiling a status report on biological invasions at a national level. The resulting scheme has been submitted to an international journal where it will be subjected to rigorous peer review. The indicators are described in more detail in chapter 2.

Assign values to indicators – based on the data collated, one of the major tasks of the drafting team was to assign values to the indicators. in most cases, the original data needed to be interpreted in order to assign these values to indicators, and in many other cases data were simply not available. (see chapter 8 for a discussion of these gaps).

Tus of biological invasions and Their managemenT in souTh africa2017

Identify stakeholders to participate in peer review – the impending initiation of the national status report process was communicated to stakeholders in concert with dea’s road-show on the nem:ba a&is regulations in 2015, and as part of the scientific symposium and special issue. but in august 2016, a formal notice informing interested parties of the process to develop a national status report on biological invasions was circulated to the south african invasives list server (invasives@wordlink.co.za); heads of relevant national and provincial government departments;

heads of relevant academic departments and institutions; and professional societies and forums (including the royal society of south africa; the akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns; the Zoological, entomological and botanical societies; birdlife south africa; and the Wildlife and environment society of south africa). stakeholders were asked to supply their contact details if they wished to be involved in the review of draft chapters of the report.

Figure 1.3 In January 2017, the process of drafting the National Status Report on Biological Invasions was officially launched by the SANBI ceo and the chair of the SANBI Board during the Parliamentary oversight visit attended by members of the Parliamentary Portfolio committee on the environment. from left to right: Dr Joseph Matjila (SANBI Board); Prof. Brian van Wilgen (SANBI Board); Mr Thomas Hadebe (Portfolio committee); Ms Johanna Steenkamp (Portfolio committee); Mrs Helen kekana (Portfolio committee); Mr Solomon Mabilo (Portfolio committee); Ms Nana Magomola (SANBI Board chair); Dr Sebataolo Rahlao (SANBI); Dr Tanya Abrahamse (SANBI ceo); Mr Phillemon Mapulane (Portfolio committee chair); Mr Ross Purdon (Portfolio committee). Photograph: J. Masilo.

Production and review of the first-order draft – in may 2017, first drafts of chapters were produced by the drafting team, based on information from the sources mentioned above. all identified stakeholders were given an opportunity to provide comments and suggestions for improvement on a first-order draft (which included complete drafts of chapters 1 to 7; but no chapters 8 and 9). an opportunity for comment was also extended to members of the intergovernmental forum: Working group 1 on biodiversity and conservation. draft chapters were revised to address any issues raised by reviewers and to incorporate any additional information provided.

The comments and responses were documented and are available for scrutiny from sanbi on request.

Production and review of the second-order draft – in september 2017, a second-order draft (with versions of all the chapters) of the status report was circulated to all members of the reference and advisory committee, and to domain experts selected to cover the major aspects addressed in the report. following this review, final revisions of the draft report were made. The comments and responses were again documented and are available for scrutiny from sanbi on request.

ChaPter 1IinTroduc

Present preliminary findings – parallel to the above processes, preliminary findings, the overall framework, and the indicators were presented at a variety of scientific forums including: the annual research symposium on the management of biological invasions in southern africa (may 2016); the annual biodiversity Planning forum (June 2016 and June 2017); the department of environmental affair’s research indaba (august 2016 and august 2017); the south african association of botanists’ annual conferences (January 2017 and 2018); the biodiversity management and Planning forum (august 2017); talks at various research institutions (e.g. the university of the free state and the university of venda); and a presentation to the Parliamentary Portfolio committee on environment. invited plenary lectures were also given at the 2017 annual research symposium on the management of biological invasions in southern africa (part of the combined congress of the entomological and Zoological societies of southern africa, essa/Zssa, July 2017), and the 14^th international conference on the ecology and management of alien Plant invasions (september 2017). The feedback received was incorporated into the report.

Produce status report – the status report was completed at the end of 2017, and submitted to the minister of environmental affairs early in 2018.

Box 1.3. a SPeCiaL iSSue of the jourNaL BOTHALIA: AFRICAN BIODIVERSITY

& CONSERVATION iN SuPPort of the NatioNaL StatuS rePort oN BioLoGiCaL iNvaSioNS

The 43^rd Annual Research Symposium on the management of Biological Invasions in Southern Africa was held at goudini Spa in the Western Cape province between 18 and 20 may 2016. following a process of peer review and revision, 19 papers and an editorial overview were published in a special issue of the journal Bothalia: African Biodiversity and Conservation (volume 47, Issue 2, march 2017). This special issue constitutes an additional product arising from the process undertaken to produce this status report. The papers, and the aspects that they address, are listed below. All papers are free to download. https://abcjournal.org/index.php/

ABC/issue/view/113

Papers (listed alphabetically by lead author) Relevant chapter(s)

Clusella-Trullas, S. & garcia, R.A.

Impacts of invasive plants on animal diversity in South Africa: a synthesis.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2166

Species

faulkner, K.T., hurley, B.p., Robertson, m.p., Rouget, m. & Wilson, J.R.u.

The balance of trade in alien species between South Africa and the rest of Africa.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2157

pathways

foxcroft, l.C., van Wilgen, N.J., Baard, J. & Cole, N.

Biological invasions in South African National parks.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2158

Areas, Control greve, m., mathakutha, R., Steyn, C. & Chown, S.l.

Terrestrial invasions on Sub-Antarctic marion and prince Edward Islands.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2143

Areas,

Control & Regulations henderson, l. & Wilson, J.R.u.

Changes in the composition and distribution of alien plants in South Africa:

an update from the Southern African plant Invaders Atlas (SApIA).

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2172

Species,

Control & Regulations

Tus of biological invasions and Their managemenT in souTh africa2017

hill, m.p. & Coetzee, J.

The biological control of aquatic weeds in South Africa: current status and future challenges.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2152

Control, Species

Irlich, u.m., potgieter, l., Stafford, l. & gaertner, m.

Recommendations for municipalities to become compliant with national legislation on biological invasions.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2156

Regulations

Kaplan, h., Wilson, J.R.u., Klein, h., henderson, l., Zimmermann, h.g., manyama, p., Ivey, p., Richardson, d.m. & Novoa, A.

A proposed national strategic framework for the management of Cactaceae in South Africa.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2149

Control, Regulations

& Species

Keller, R.p. & Kumschick, S.

promise and challenges of risk assessment as an approach for preventing the arrival of harmful alien species.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2136

Regulations

Kraaij, T., Baard, J.A., Rikhotso, d.R., Cole, N.S. & van Wilgen, B.W.

Assessing the efficiency of invasive alien plant management in a large fynbos protected area.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2105

Control

marr, S.m., Ellender, B.R., Woodford, d.J., Alexander, m.E., Wasserman, R.J., Ivey, p., Zengeya, T. & Weyl, O.l.f.

Evaluating invasion risk for freshwater fishes in South Africa.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2177

Regulations & Species

measey, J., davies, S., vimercati, g., Rebelo, A., Schmidt, W. & Turner, A.

Invasive amphibians in southern Africa: a review of invasion pathways.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2117

pathways & Species

picker, m.d. & griffiths, C.l.

Alien animals in South Africa – composition, introduction history, origins and distribution patterns.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2147

Species & pathways

Scholes, R.J., Schreiner, g. & Snyman-van der Walt, l.

Scientific assessments: matching the process to the problem.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2144

Regulations

visser, v., Wilson, J.R.u., Canavan, K., Canavan, S., fish, l., le maitre, d., Nänni, I., mashau, C., O’Connor, T., Ivey, p., Kumschick, S., Richardson, d.m. & the Alien grass Working group grasses as invasive plants in South Africa revisited: patterns, pathways and management.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2169

Species, pathways, Control & Regulations

Wood, A.R.

fungi and invasions in South Africa.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2124

Species & Regulations

Woodford, d.J., Ivey, p., Jordaan, m.S., Kimberg, p.K., Zengeya, T. & Weyl, O.l.f.

Optimising invasive fish management in the context of invasive species legislation in South Africa.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2138

Control, Regulations

& Species

Zachariades, C., paterson, I.d., Strathie, l.W., hill, m.p. & van Wilgen, B.W.

Assessing the status of biological control as a management tool for suppression of invasive alien plants in South Africa.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2142

Control, Regulations &

Species

Zengeya, T., Ivey, p., Woodford, d., Weyl, O., Novoa, A., Shackleton, R., Richardson, d.m. &

van Wilgen, B.W.

managing conflict-generating invasive species in South Africa: Challenges and trade-offs.

https://doi.org/10.4102/abc.v47i2.2160

Regulations

iNdiCatorS 2

Lead authors:

John Wilson, Brian van Wilgen

Contributing authors:

Katelyn faulkner, david Richardson, Sebataolo Rahlao, Tsungai Zengeya

Chapter summary

This chapter outlines the development of a set of 21 indicators for assessing three main aspects of invasions (pathways, species, and areas), as well interventions (in terms of both the effectiveness of control measures, and the effectiveness of the regulations). for each indicator, a fact-sheet was developed, outlining how the indicators are to be measured and providing a method for ascribing a level of confidence when assigning values to indicators.

indicators for pathways describe the opportunities available for introduction to and dispersal within south africa, as well as the degree to which alien species are being introduced along these pathways.

indicators for species include the number and status of alien species in the country, the extent and abundance of these alien species, and the impacts caused.

indicators for invaded areas include the number of alien species in different areas, the alien species richness relative to indigenous species richness, the abundance of invasive species relative to the abundance of indigenous species, and the impact of invasions on particular areas.

indicators for the interventions include an assessment of key inputs (the regulatory framework, the money spent and the planning coverage), outputs (the degree and quality of treatments applied to pathways, species and areas) and outcomes (the effectiveness of treatments of pathways, species and areas, as well as returns on investment).

This chapter also proposes four high-level indicators: 1) the rate of introduction of new unregulated species; 2) the number of invasive species that have major impacts; 3) the extent of area that suffers major impacts from invasions; and (4) the level of success in managing invasions.

Acacia paradoxa (Kangaroo thorn) – John Wilson

Tus of biological invasions and Their managemenT in souTh africa2017

2.1. iNtroduCtioN

a set of robust indicators is needed to provide a comprehensive picture of the state of biological invasions.

While there has been some progress towards this goal at an international level (hawkins et al., 2015, latombe et al., 2017), much remains to be done. it was clear that south africa’s first national status report should build on these international initiatives, but it was also necessary to develop additional indicators to cover those aspects that were not yet catered for in the developing international framework. in addition, there is a specific need to include indicators that directly address the reporting requirements outlined in the regulations. furthermore, there are no data available to accurately assign values to some indicators for south africa, nor will it be feasible to collect such data in the medium-term. The process of indicator development in this area will need to continue both in terms of fundamental research, and as part of the development of a practical and informative monitoring framework for biological invasions in south africa. as such, the indicators proposed here constitute a compromise, partly from international frameworks, partly from first principles, partly simply in terms of a reflection of which data are currently available, while ensuring that there is alignment with the requirements in the regulations.

This chapter presents a set of indicators for use in establishing the status of biological invasions in south africa based on basic inventory and ecological research and the monitoring and reporting of the effectiveness of regulations and control measures (figure 2.1). This chapter also presents a methodology for ascribing a level of confidence when assigning values to these indicators.

2.2. the ratioNaLe for the aPProaCh

The phenomenon of biological invasions is caused by a combination of how taxa are moved around by humans (introduction dynamics), the traits of individual taxa (invasiveness), and the susceptibility of the environment to

effecTiveness of responses

A set of four high-level indicators has been developed to track trends in:

A

the rate of introduction of new unregulated species

to South Africa

7

^{PeR yeAR}

B

the number of invasive species that have major

impacts

107 _SPecIeS

C

the extent of South Africa that suffers major impacts

from invasions

1.4%

of THe lAND AReA

D

the level of success in

managing invasions

5.5%

The values assigned to these indicators set a baseline against which trends in future can be measured, with the overall goal being to implement control and regulatory measures that will improve the situation as measured by these indicators.

ChaPter 2Iindica

invasions (invasibility). for example, the current distribution of invasive pines in south africa is a result of how pines have historically been planted for forestry, which species have particular traits that predispose them to invade, and the fact that some areas of the country do not have any indigenous fire-adapted tree species and so are susceptible to woody plant invasions (e.g. the cape floristic region). The explicit consideration of biological invasions in terms of these three aspects [i.e. pathways, species (or more precisely taxa), and areas] is also crucially important for management. focussing on pathways is important to reduce rates of introduction and spread, but does not address current invasions. focussing on species can be highly effective in reducing densities of a single species, but can simply clear the way for other species to invade.

integrated and strategic approaches are needed to deal with suites of co-occurring species in any given area, but if management is to be effective in those areas, pathways of introduction need to be managed and in most cases best practice species-specific control measures will need to be implemented.

The invasion process is commonly categorised in terms of an introduction-naturalisation-invasion continuum (blackburn et al., 2011). There are four major invasion stages – pre-introduction, incursion, expansion, and dominance – that align with four management goals – prevention, eradication, containment, and impact reduction. The combination of the need to look at indicators for pathways, species and areas, as well as the need to look at pre-introduction, incursion, expansion and dominance, gives rise to the 3 × 4 framework. This framework was the basis of the draft national strategy on biological invasions in south africa, and is discussed in detail by Wilson, Panetta & lindgren (2017). however, the development of indicators for all aspects of invasions at all invasion stages still requires some theoretical development. This report concentrates on indicators for the three aspects (pathways, species, and areas), and not on the four stages (pre-introduction, incursion, expansion, and dominance), although a future report may seek to develop the indicators needed to cover all components of the 3 × 4 framework.

There are, of course, many other ways of conceptualising or categorising biological invasions. Taxonomic, disciplinary or functional lines could also be used, e.g. by considering freshwater fish invasions and riparian plant invasions as separate problems. alternatively, a status report could be divided into specific biomes, environments or realms. south africa’s national biodiversity assessment has, to date, taken this approach and is presented as a series of chapters based on ‘realms’ – freshwater, marine, and terrestrial. in terms of

There are, of course, many other ways of conceptualising or categorising biological invasions. Taxonomic, disciplinary or functional lines could also be used, e.g. by considering freshwater fish invasions and riparian plant invasions as separate problems. alternatively, a status report could be divided into specific biomes, environments or realms. south africa’s national biodiversity assessment has, to date, taken this approach and is presented as a series of chapters based on ‘realms’ – freshwater, marine, and terrestrial. in terms of

Dans le document The sTaTus of biological invasions and Their managemenT in souTh africa 2017 (Page 28-0)