I finally got around to reading this paper after sitting in my mail box
since the end of January. I really need to get my butt in gear and make
regular time to read new research...No matter.

I found the research quite interesting (being a botanist and all). Those of
us with awareness often experience malice toward exotic invasive species
that alter, or destroy, our native ecosystems and species. I know the fire
ant is counted among these species we wish to eradicate. I give kudos to
the authors for their consideration of the impact that might have on the
ecosystems. Personally, I have never really considered that there could be
anything but positive changes from the eradication of invasive species. But
now I understand that, having been here for decades or even centuries, many
of the invasive species we seek to destroy have actually become PART of the
ecosystem we are wishing to restore.

I do have a question though regarding this particular study. What impact
does the Mediterranean Gecko have on the ecosystem and its species? As we
know many exotic species are not noxious and I did not read any mention of
the potential negative impact from rebounding gecko populations. I think
proposing caution to eradication of Fire Ants due to the increase of the
gecko warrants a reason to be cautious of the gecko. It seems that while
eradication (or even just suppression) of the Fire Ant may increase the
gecko population slightly, but the gecko has plenty of other limiting
factors, as mentioned in the study, to keep it under control.

Another thing I noticed was the extreme measures required the reduce the
Fire Ant population. Two different insecticides applied every month for
five years seems like a lot. And, while the reduction in ant mounds was
significant over the study period (from 152 mounds to 5-10), one would hope
that this eradication program would eliminate them all together. It would
be highly labor intensive not to mention a large amount of chemical usage
to apply this eradication program population wide. Just my thoughts, I know
it was not the point of the study to suggest an eradication program.

Just one other nitty gritty thing. I noticed some inconsistency in
formatting throughout the paper. The majority of the time animals and
insects referenced gave common names first followed by scientific name in
parentheses. However, in two locations (one in the introduction and one in
the discussion section, several species were referenced by scientific name
alone.

Overall I thoroughly enjoyed this article and the mental stimulation.

Thank you


On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Malcolm McCallum <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Here is a small-scale case study that just came out.
> It might be useful to those working in fire ant areas.
>
> http://www.cnah.org/Travis/88059.pdf
>
> --
> Malcolm L. McCallum
> Department of Environmental Studies
> University of Illinois at Springfield
>
> Managing Editor,
> Herpetological Conservation and Biology
>
>  "Nothing is more priceless and worthy of preservation than the rich array
> of animal life with which our country has been blessed. It is a
> many-faceted treasure, of value to scholars, scientists, and nature lovers
> alike, and it forms a vital part of the heritage we all share as
> Americans."
> -President Richard Nixon upon signing the Endangered Species Act of 1973
> into law.
>
> "Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive" - Allan
> Nation
>
> 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea"  W.S. Gilbert
> 1990's:  Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss,
>             and pollution.
> 2000:  Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction
>           MAY help restore populations.
> 2022: Soylent Green is People!
>
> The Seven Blunders of the World (Mohandas Gandhi)
> Wealth w/o work
> Pleasure w/o conscience
> Knowledge w/o character
> Commerce w/o morality
> Science w/o humanity
> Worship w/o sacrifice
> Politics w/o principle
>
> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
> attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
> contain confidential and privileged information.  Any unauthorized
> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not
> the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
> destroy all copies of the original message.
>



-- 
Tierney Rosenstock
MSc Environmental Studies
(413)358-2312

Horticulturalist/botanist

Park Ranger I
OHV Permit Program
MA Dept. Conservation & Recreation

Reply via email to