AQUATIC PLANT MANAGEMENT:
FUTURE CONCERNS

We all have tremendous challenges before us as we face the profound environmental and economic problems being created by invasive nonindigenous plants in Florida. In light of the crisis, there are at least three major concerns for the future that stand out.

The first concern we have is that the public, along with many of the political leaders of our state, have not shown any great concern over the crisis being created by invasive exotic aquatic plants. For whatever reasons, they are in a state of denial. When the evidence is clear and intelligent people will not accept that evidence, then they are in psychological denial, and as long as that denial lasts the aquatic ecosystems of this state will continue to suffer.

Perhaps one reason for the lack of general interest in the problem is the conservation dilemma posed by invasive exotic aquatic species. I am referring to the fact that the actions required to "correct" the problems entail the killing or removal of these plants. Such activities are far less popular than traditional activities related to environmental protection such as buying land for preservation, mitigation that attempts to create wetlands, or regulatory activities that are designed to protect threatened and endangered species. While the public and our leaders profess to support the idea of preserving and restoring aquatic ecosystems, killing nonindigenous plants in order to accomplish this is not appealing to them. This negative attitude often causes resistance, not only to the effective methods available (most of which are the result of outstanding research), but to the idea that such management is a necessity at all. We often hear someone contend that when a monospecific stand of invasive exotics is found in a water body, we should just leave it alone and let "nature" take care of the problem. They forget that "nature" did not place these plants here, and their co-evolved natural enemies which keep them in balance in their home range are not present.

Others contend that nothing serious has really happened, that we just have to change the use we make of that water body. But what use can we make of a lake covered entirely with topped-out hydrilla? We can't swim in it. We can't fish it. Recreational boating is impossible. Even flood control and irrigation are adversely affected. In addition, the native biodiversity is being displaced, and property values are being lowered. Probably the only ones happy with this situation are the few ducks and coots that feed on hydrilla--a big price to pay for duck food!

This sometimes agonizingly slow, and sometimes startling rapid attack on biodiversity has come to be considered "normal", and is therefore largely ignored. Most of the state and its waters are no longer in a pristine or undisturbed condition. Native species are increasingly confined to limited spaces, habitat islands with artificial boundaries and conditions. These spaces were originally influenced by natural processes originating both within and outside their boundaries. These natural processes have been extensively altered by human activities. During the coming decades, the populations of invasive exotic species that do well in these disturbed environments will continue to thrive unless corrective actions are taken.

A second concern for the future relates to the continued introduction of new invasive nonindigenous species. Will there be another hydrilla-like exotic to appear in our water bodies in the future? With the continued importation, sale, and dissemination of nonindigenous aquatic plants without their first being screened for potential invasiveness, it is not a question of "if" but "when". It is shocking to see the cavalier attitude with which nonindigenous species are allowed to be imported into our state. We recognize that most exotics will never become invasive if they escape into the natural environment, and we also recognize that some exotics enhance our lives in many ways, not only as food, but also as things that provide aesthetic values. However that should not keep us from being concerned about those that do escape and do become invasive. New invasive exotics could literally cost millions, if not hundreds of millions to eradicate or keep under maintenance control, and frankly, we do not have the necessary funds to deal with those we already have.

What value do we place upon our ecosystems? What value do we place upon native habitat for fish and wildlife? What value do we place upon the loss of the use of our water bodies for recreational purposes? What value do we place upon irrigation, or flood control, or even our potable water supply? True, all of these things are difficult to evaluate, but that does not mean they have no economic value. It is hard to off-set all these costs with the little profit that is to be had by a special interest group through the sale of invasive nonindigenous aquatic plant species.

During the past twenty years, millions of dollars have been spent in the programs to bring invasive exotic aquatic plants under maintenance control, while at the same time virtually nothing has been spent to prohibit the introduction of additional invasive exotic plant species. That is the moral equivalent of trying to clean up a water body while you continue to dump untreated sewage into it. Under present law, there is nothing that can be done until after an exotic introduction has occurred and proved to be invasive. By that time, eradication may be impossible and the effects on the environment may be virtually irreversible.

A third concern we have for the future relates to the funding necessary to bring invasive, nonindigenous aquatic plants under maintenance control, including the funding for the necessary related research that must be done. For many reasons, our costs are escalating dramatically. For example, every year funding for management activities remains low, new infestations occur and existing infestations expand, dramatically increasing the costs of achieving or restoring maintenance control. Also, in the past ten years there has been a 70% increase in herbicide and mechanical harvester costs. Add to this the loss of federal funds and you have the makings of a real environmental catastrophe.

We have estimated that the funding needed for hydrilla alone for this fiscal year to be about $13 million. [But the Bureau received only about a tenth of that...Ed.] At present, water hyacinth and water lettuce are under maintenance control, and hydrilla is under maintenance control in about 30 of our large public water bodies. We estimate that the total acres of hydrilla remaining in public waters to be about 45,000 acres--down from about 100,000 acres of two years ago. This is impressive progress which soon could be lost.

At the same time that invasive aquatic plant problems are being under funded, both the public and political leaders are focused on water quality issues. The irony is that we may spend millions, if not hundreds of millions as in the case of the Everglades, to improve water quality, only to find that the beneficiaries of that improvement are the invasive exotics that are destroying our biodiversity and negatively impacting the economy of the state by millions of dollars annually.

These three concerns constitute what I believe is a formula for the creation of an environmental disaster: an uninformed and uncaring public; a cavalier attitude regarding the introduction of invasive exotic plant species; and an unwillingness on the part of government to commit the funds necessary to avert this tragedy.