Economic Impacts of Economic Impacts of Aquatic Invasive SpeciesAquatic Invasive Species

Oconto County presentationDale Mohr CNRED

UW-ExtensionOriginally Presented by Chad Cook Basin Educator

August 22nd 2006

What are Invasive Species?What are Invasive Species?

Definition: Non-native plants and animals that may cause economic, environmental, or recreational harm or affect human health.

Invasive because:• No natural predators,

parasites, etc.• Often aggressive,

prolific, and mature early

(See Handouts and posters)

PlantsPlants

Purple Loosestrife

Eurasian Water-Milfoil

Common Reed

InvertebratesInvertebratesSpiny & Fishhook Waterfleas

Rusty Crayfish

Zebra Mussels

VertebratesVertebrates

White PerchRound Goby

Alewife Sea Lamprey

OthersOthers

Quagga MusselsQuagga MusselsCommon CarpCommon CarpRainbow SmeltRainbow SmeltThreespine SticklebackThreespine SticklebackReed Canary GrassReed Canary GrassCurly-Leaf PondweedCurly-Leaf PondweedFlowering RushFlowering Rush‘‘Cylindro’Cylindro’And MoreAnd More

Future Threats?Future Threats?

Asian CarpAsian CarpSnakeheadSnakeheadThree-spine sticklebackThree-spine sticklebackNew Zealand mud snailNew Zealand mud snailNumerous Plants:Numerous Plants:

• HydrillaHydrilla• Water chestnutWater chestnut• Water hyacynthWater hyacynth• Water lettuceWater lettuce

AIS Economic Impacts In AIS Economic Impacts In U.S.U.S.

Ecological damage Ecological damage & control costs: $9 & control costs: $9 billion annually billion annually (Pimentel, (Pimentel,

2003)2003)

• Fish - $5.4 billionFish - $5.4 billion• Zebra/Quagga Zebra/Quagga

Mussels - $1 billionMussels - $1 billion• Plants - $500 millionPlants - $500 million

Zebra MusselsZebra Mussels

Damage & control costsDamage & control costs• $1 billion annually (Pimentel et al., 2005)$1 billion annually (Pimentel et al., 2005)• $5 billion annually (Lovell and Stone, 2005)$5 billion annually (Lovell and Stone, 2005)

Municipal and industrial water intake costsMunicipal and industrial water intake costs• Small: $20,000 annuallySmall: $20,000 annually• Large: $350,000 - $400,000 annually (Ruetter)Large: $350,000 - $400,000 annually (Ruetter)

Power plant costs (USGS)Power plant costs (USGS)• Hydropower: $83,000 annuallyHydropower: $83,000 annually• Fossil fuel: $145,000 annuallyFossil fuel: $145,000 annually• Nuclear: $822,000 annuallyNuclear: $822,000 annually

Sea LampreySea Lamprey

Chemical Control - $13 Chemical Control - $13 million annually in Great million annually in Great LakesLakes

Release of sterile malesRelease of sterile malesBarrier constructionBarrier constructionLake trout stocking Lake trout stocking

programprogramLosses of other Lake Losses of other Lake

Michigan sport and Michigan sport and commercial fishescommercial fishes

• = $26 million/yr= $26 million/yr

RuffeRuffe

Losses to native fishery: $500,000 Losses to native fishery: $500,000 annually annually (Lovell and Stone, 2005)(Lovell and Stone, 2005)

Eurasian Water-Milfoil & Eurasian Water-Milfoil & Curly-Leaf PondweedCurly-Leaf Pondweed

$400 - $600/ac to $400 - $600/ac to treat EWM/CLP in WItreat EWM/CLP in WI

$1.1 million spent $1.1 million spent for chemical for chemical treatment on 2,300 treatment on 2,300 ac in 2003 in WI ac in 2003 in WI (DNR)(DNR)

Purple LoosestrifePurple Loosestrife

Spreading at 285,000 ac/yrSpreading at 285,000 ac/yrLosses and control: $45 million Losses and control: $45 million

annually in U.S. (Pimentel et al., annually in U.S. (Pimentel et al., 2005)2005)

Secondary Impacts – Secondary Impacts – Difficult to Difficult to measuremeasure

Nuisance Nuisance ControlControl

Property ValuesProperty ValuesTourismTourismFisheriesFisheriesHealthHealth

Nuisance AlgaeNuisance Algae$4 million $4 million

annually at each annually at each power plant on power plant on Lake Michigan Lake Michigan on nuisance on nuisance algae control algae control (pers. (pers.

comm. WE Energies)comm. WE Energies)

Property Value ImpactsProperty Value Impacts

High potential High potential from nuisance from nuisance conditions conditions created by AIScreated by AIS

Many costs born Many costs born by ripariansby riparians

Demand for lake Demand for lake front property front property remains strongremains strong

Property Value ImpactsProperty Value Impacts

Correlation between property value and water Correlation between property value and water quality - clarity (Krysel et al., 2003)quality - clarity (Krysel et al., 2003)

Residential property value quantified as being at Residential property value quantified as being at risk at approximately 10% due to EWM infestation risk at approximately 10% due to EWM infestation (Deamud et al., 2004)(Deamud et al., 2004)

Infestation by hydrilla reduced property value by at Infestation by hydrilla reduced property value by at least 10% (TVA, 1994 in Bell & Bonn, 2004)least 10% (TVA, 1994 in Bell & Bonn, 2004)• = Willingness to pay= Willingness to pay• Complete control raised property values 17 – 35%Complete control raised property values 17 – 35%

No apparent impact of AIS on real estate market in No apparent impact of AIS on real estate market in Door County or Shawano Lake area (personal Door County or Shawano Lake area (personal communication)communication)• Major effect is putting up with nuisance conditionsMajor effect is putting up with nuisance conditions

Studies to be conducted in Vilas County and Studies to be conducted in Vilas County and Waupaca Chain O’Lakes in 2006 Waupaca Chain O’Lakes in 2006

Tourism ImpactsTourism Impacts

Proliferation of EWM/CLPProliferation of EWM/CLPCladophoraCladophora on beaches on beaches

Tourism ImpactsTourism Impacts

Value of day at the beach Value of day at the beach in Chicago estimated at in Chicago estimated at $35/person $35/person (Shaikh, 2005)(Shaikh, 2005)

State Park Day VisitorsJun - Aug

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

PEN

WD

PB

KA

HB

Fishery ImpactsFishery Impacts

Lake Michigan fishery Lake Michigan fishery is comprised of many is comprised of many exotic speciesexotic species

Fishery ImpactsFishery Impacts

Zebra mussels are changing Zebra mussels are changing the Lake Michigan food chainthe Lake Michigan food chain

Potential to impact WI’s $120 Potential to impact WI’s $120 million salmon and trout million salmon and trout fisheryfishery

Smelt Catch

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001

Millio

ns

of

po

un

ds

Summer LM

Green Bay

Lk Michigan

Uses of AIS Economic DataUses of AIS Economic Data

ActualActual• Costs to control AISCosts to control AIS

o Water intake costs to control ZMWater intake costs to control ZM

o Riparians’ costs to control EWMRiparians’ costs to control EWM

• Cost data for impacts other than control are Cost data for impacts other than control are sparsesparse

Fear-BasedFear-Based• Drives many AIS management decisionsDrives many AIS management decisions

o Riparians fear reduction in property valueRiparians fear reduction in property value

o Local gov’ts concerned about potential for reduced Local gov’ts concerned about potential for reduced property tax revenueproperty tax revenue

• Fears can be realFears can be real

SummarySummary

AIS cost estimates often vary widely, either AIS cost estimates often vary widely, either due to actual differences in AIS impacts, or due to actual differences in AIS impacts, or because of inconsistent estimation because of inconsistent estimation methodologymethodology

Many impacts have not been estimated or Many impacts have not been estimated or are difficult to economically assess are difficult to economically assess

Economic fear drives many AIS Economic fear drives many AIS management decisionsmanagement decisions

AIS cost estimates need to consider AIS cost estimates need to consider valuations other than just control costs – valuations other than just control costs – e.g., human health values, use values, e.g., human health values, use values, existence values, or valuations of existence values, or valuations of ecosystem services ecosystem services

AIS Management MessagesAIS Management Messages

Wisconsin’s Comprehensive AIS Wisconsin’s Comprehensive AIS Management PlanManagement Plan1.1. Prevent new introductionsPrevent new introductions

• Collaborate with user groups representing potential Collaborate with user groups representing potential transport vectorstransport vectors

2.2. Limit the spread of established populationsLimit the spread of established populations• Public awarenessPublic awareness

• MonitoringMonitoring

3.3. Abate the harmful impacts from AISAbate the harmful impacts from AIS• Develop control strategiesDevelop control strategies

Effective AIS Effective AIS Management/Control ProgramsManagement/Control Programs Clean Boats, Clean WatersClean Boats, Clean Waters

• Contact Laura Felda, UWEX/DNRContact Laura Felda, UWEX/DNR AIS GrantsAIS Grants

• Contact DNR regional lakes/AIS grant coordinatorContact DNR regional lakes/AIS grant coordinator Purple loosestrife bio-controlPurple loosestrife bio-control

• Contact Brock Woods, DNRContact Brock Woods, DNR Citizen Monitoring NetworkCitizen Monitoring Network

• Contact Laura Herman, UWEXContact Laura Herman, UWEX Fish hatchery/bait collector HACCP plansFish hatchery/bait collector HACCP plans

• Contact Phil Moy, Sea GrantContact Phil Moy, Sea Grant Sea lamprey controlSea lamprey control

Thank You!Thank You!

New Exotic Found in Wisconsin July 2nd 2006 – Originally introduced by Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) to control the Deer population and spread of CWD.