Community network for deaf scientists.
Community network for deaf scientists.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1126/science.aan2330
复制
发表时间：
2017-04-28
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Wong V
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Adler HJ;Anbuhl KL;Atcherson SR;Barlow N;Brennan MA;Brigande JV;Buran BN;Fraenzer JT;Gale JE;Gallun FJ;Gluck SD;Goldsworthy RL;Heng J;Hight AE;Huyck JJ;Jacobson BD;Karasawa T;Kovačić D;Lim SR;Malone AK;Nolan LS;Pisano DV;Rao VRM;Raphael RM;Ratnanather JT;Reiss LAJ;Ruffin CV;Schwalje AT;Sinan M;Stahn P;Steyger PS;Tang SJ;Tejani VD;Wong V
在他们的信“墨西哥的模棱两可的入侵物种计划”(3月10日，第1033页)中，LM Ochoa-Ochoa等人。声称墨西哥入侵物种名单(1)是不完整和模棱两可的。他们没有在适当的背景下考虑这份名单。入侵物种清单既不是静态的，也不是详尽的，也不是为了提供管理指南。相反，该清单的目的是提供法律依据，允许外来入侵物种方案在个案的基础上，通过特定的法律工具来预防、控制和根除最有害的外来入侵物种(2-4)。这也是有效实施《国家入侵物种战略(4、5)》的关键要素。这份清单是5年多来从科学文献、分类学更新和专家咨询中识别法律漏洞和收集数据的成果。使用了几种方法，包括风险评估，其中考虑了现有基线信息、原生范围、引入范围、引入日期、途径和影响，以及与数据来源相关的不确定性[(6)和第(7)章第6和7章]。来自政府、非政府组织和学术界的50多名外来入侵物种专家对结果进行了审查，并受益于为期一个月的公众咨询，专家和公众分享了他们的担忧(8)。虽然还有改进的空间，但当前版本的名单中对已知入侵物种的识别填补了一个重要的法律空白。多亏了这份名单，墨西哥的岛屿外来入侵物种计划(5)被授权有效地处理入侵的外来和野生哺乳动物，包括奥乔亚-奥乔亚等人提到的蟒蛇。这份清单不包括，也不一定要包括所有水生物种，主要是因为这些物种的法律责任由农业、畜牧和渔业部和环境部分担。被遗漏的物种可以通过其他方式进行考虑。例如，最近对观赏鱼物种的风险评估(6，7)导致禁止进口和养殖入侵的盘古鱼活体标本。因此，该清单可以扩大，或作为一系列清单的一部分，放在更广泛的范围内处理外来入侵物种，可以转化为公共政策和贯穿各领域的战略行动。
In their Letter “Mexico’s ambiguous invasive species plan”(10 March, p. 1033), LM Ochoa-Ochoa et al. claimed that the Mexican invasive species list (1) is incomplete and ambiguous. They were not considering the list in the appropriate context. The invasive species list is neither static nor exhaustive, and it is not intended to offer management guidelines. Rather, the purpose of the list is to provide the legal basis that allows alien invasive species programs, on a case-by-case basis, to prevent, control, and eradicate the most noxious alien invasive species through specific legal tools (2–4). It is also a key element to effectively implement the National Invasive Species Strategy (4, 5). The list is the product of more than 5 years of work to identify legal gaps and gather data from scientific literature, taxonomic updates, and expert consultations. Several methods were used, including risk assessments that considered existing baseline information, native ranges, introduced ranges, dates of introduction, pathways, and impacts, as well as the uncertainty associated with the data sources [(6) and chapters 6 and 7 in (7)]. The results were reviewed by more than 50 alien invasive species specialists—from government, nongovernmental organizations, and academia—and benefited from a 1-month public consultation, in which experts and the general public shared their concerns (8).There is room for improvement, but the identification of known invasive species in the current version of the list fills an important legal void. Thanks to the list, Mexico’s island alien invasive species program (5) is empowered to efficiently deal with invasive exotic and feral mammals, including the Boa constrictor, mentioned by Ochoa-Ochoa et al. The list does not, nor does it have to, include all aquatic species, mainly because the legal responsibility for such species is split between the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Fisheries and the Ministry of Environment. Omitted species can be considered through other means. For example, recent risk assessments for ornamental fish species (6, 7) have led to a ban on importing and cultivating live specimens of the invasive Pangasius. Thus, the list can be expanded or be part of a series of lists which, placed in a broader spectrum to tackle alien invasive species, can be translated into public policies and cross-cutting strategic actions.