TY - JOUR
T1 - Key attributes influence the performance of local weed management programs in the southwest United States
AU - Hershdorfer, Mary E.
AU - Fernandez-Gimenez, Maria E.
AU - Howery, Larry D.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors acknowledge the supports from the SEEMPAD associate team project (http://project.inria.fr/seempad/), the FRQNT (Fonds de recherche Qu?bec nature et technologie) and NSERC (National Science and Engineering Research Council).
PY - 2007/5
Y1 - 2007/5
N2 - In the southwestern United States, local weed management programs are increasingly important in weed prevention and control; however, little is known about the effectiveness of different local approaches to weed management. We surveyed coordinators of 53 local weed management programs in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah to determine how 4 key program attributes (interagency coordination, volunteer participation, regulatory authority and enforcement, and the state in which the program was located) were related with 4 performance measures: weed control, public education and outreach, weed monitoring, and integrated weed management. Based on the responses of 42 program coordinators (79%) we found that 1) weed programs that coordinated their activities with other organizations and those with citizen volunteers conducted more monitoring, but programs that did not coordinate or use volunteers treated more of their infested acreage; 2) programs that used a light-handed regulatory approach conducted more weed control than those with more punitive enforcement regimes or no enforcement authority; and 3) Colorado programs conducted more outreach and education than did programs in the other 3 states. Thus, although volunteer involvement and interagency coordination contributed to the performance of the local weed programs studied, particularly in monitoring, they have not compensated for the lack of locally enforceable weed regulations or adequate funding. Successful weed management in southwestern United States will require adequately funded, locally adapted approaches supported by locally enforceable weed regulations.
AB - In the southwestern United States, local weed management programs are increasingly important in weed prevention and control; however, little is known about the effectiveness of different local approaches to weed management. We surveyed coordinators of 53 local weed management programs in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah to determine how 4 key program attributes (interagency coordination, volunteer participation, regulatory authority and enforcement, and the state in which the program was located) were related with 4 performance measures: weed control, public education and outreach, weed monitoring, and integrated weed management. Based on the responses of 42 program coordinators (79%) we found that 1) weed programs that coordinated their activities with other organizations and those with citizen volunteers conducted more monitoring, but programs that did not coordinate or use volunteers treated more of their infested acreage; 2) programs that used a light-handed regulatory approach conducted more weed control than those with more punitive enforcement regimes or no enforcement authority; and 3) Colorado programs conducted more outreach and education than did programs in the other 3 states. Thus, although volunteer involvement and interagency coordination contributed to the performance of the local weed programs studied, particularly in monitoring, they have not compensated for the lack of locally enforceable weed regulations or adequate funding. Successful weed management in southwestern United States will require adequately funded, locally adapted approaches supported by locally enforceable weed regulations.
KW - Collective action problem
KW - Community-based natural resource management
KW - Invasive plants
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34249814018&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34249814018&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2111/1551-5028(2007)60[225:KAITPO]2.0.CO;2
DO - 10.2111/1551-5028(2007)60[225:KAITPO]2.0.CO;2
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:34249814018
SN - 1550-7424
VL - 60
SP - 225
EP - 234
JO - Rangeland Ecology and Management
JF - Rangeland Ecology and Management
IS - 3
ER -