Strategies for effective mosquito control in constructed treatment wetlands

Robert L. Knight, William E. Walton, George F. O'Meara, William Reisen, Roland Wass

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

73 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Constructed wetlands hold considerable promise for providing water quality and wildlife habitat benefits. At the same time, constructed wetlands have been described as "mosquito-friendly habitats" and may raise potential conflicts with neighboring human populations. Conflicts arise because some design features, such as shallow water and emergent vegetation that are essential for optimizing water quality polishing, can result in undesirable increases in mosquito production. The attraction of large numbers of birds to constructed wetlands could also increase the risk of transmission of mosquito-borne viral infections to humans in the vicinity of the wetland. The potential for conflict is typically highest in arid regions where natural mosquito populations have limited abundance and are found near newly urbanizing areas. The creation of wildlife habitat is a significant goal of many treatment wetlands. Humans are also welcome in many treatment wetlands for recreational and educational activities. Risks of disease transmission to humans and livestock as well as the inconvenience of mosquitoes as pests must be offset by the economic savings of inexpensive water quality enhancement and the resulting reduction in pollution that also poses a risk to society's health and well-being. Ecological risks associated with the use of mosquito control chemicals must be offset by the increased habitat benefits provided by these constructed wetlands. The right balance between these competing goals can be recognized by the design that provides the greatest net environmental and societal benefit. This paper describes these tradeoffs between mosquito control and the constructed wetland technology and provides a synthesis of information that can be used to optimize the benefits of these wetland systems. Basic research is recommended to better define the cost-effectiveness of the various design and management options.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)211-232
Number of pages22
JournalEcological Engineering
Volume21
Issue number4-5
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 31 2003

Fingerprint

Mosquito control
Wetlands
mosquito
constructed wetland
wetland
Water quality
water quality
disease transmission
chemical control
habitat
Arid regions
arid region
savings
livestock
Birds
Cost effectiveness
shallow water
Polishing
Agriculture
bird

Keywords

  • Constructed wetlands
  • Mosquito abatement
  • Wastewater treatment
  • Water quality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Environmental Engineering
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Strategies for effective mosquito control in constructed treatment wetlands. / Knight, Robert L.; Walton, William E.; O'Meara, George F.; Reisen, William; Wass, Roland.

In: Ecological Engineering, Vol. 21, No. 4-5, 31.12.2003, p. 211-232.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Knight, Robert L. ; Walton, William E. ; O'Meara, George F. ; Reisen, William ; Wass, Roland. / Strategies for effective mosquito control in constructed treatment wetlands. In: Ecological Engineering. 2003 ; Vol. 21, No. 4-5. pp. 211-232.
@article{65808b2aa19141f4ad5be32d945f9efb,
title = "Strategies for effective mosquito control in constructed treatment wetlands",
abstract = "Constructed wetlands hold considerable promise for providing water quality and wildlife habitat benefits. At the same time, constructed wetlands have been described as {"}mosquito-friendly habitats{"} and may raise potential conflicts with neighboring human populations. Conflicts arise because some design features, such as shallow water and emergent vegetation that are essential for optimizing water quality polishing, can result in undesirable increases in mosquito production. The attraction of large numbers of birds to constructed wetlands could also increase the risk of transmission of mosquito-borne viral infections to humans in the vicinity of the wetland. The potential for conflict is typically highest in arid regions where natural mosquito populations have limited abundance and are found near newly urbanizing areas. The creation of wildlife habitat is a significant goal of many treatment wetlands. Humans are also welcome in many treatment wetlands for recreational and educational activities. Risks of disease transmission to humans and livestock as well as the inconvenience of mosquitoes as pests must be offset by the economic savings of inexpensive water quality enhancement and the resulting reduction in pollution that also poses a risk to society's health and well-being. Ecological risks associated with the use of mosquito control chemicals must be offset by the increased habitat benefits provided by these constructed wetlands. The right balance between these competing goals can be recognized by the design that provides the greatest net environmental and societal benefit. This paper describes these tradeoffs between mosquito control and the constructed wetland technology and provides a synthesis of information that can be used to optimize the benefits of these wetland systems. Basic research is recommended to better define the cost-effectiveness of the various design and management options.",
keywords = "Constructed wetlands, Mosquito abatement, Wastewater treatment, Water quality",
author = "Knight, {Robert L.} and Walton, {William E.} and O'Meara, {George F.} and William Reisen and Roland Wass",
year = "2003",
month = "12",
day = "31",
doi = "10.1016/j.ecoleng.2003.11.001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "211--232",
journal = "Ecological Engineering",
issn = "0925-8574",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "4-5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Strategies for effective mosquito control in constructed treatment wetlands

AU - Knight, Robert L.

AU - Walton, William E.

AU - O'Meara, George F.

AU - Reisen, William

AU - Wass, Roland

PY - 2003/12/31

Y1 - 2003/12/31

N2 - Constructed wetlands hold considerable promise for providing water quality and wildlife habitat benefits. At the same time, constructed wetlands have been described as "mosquito-friendly habitats" and may raise potential conflicts with neighboring human populations. Conflicts arise because some design features, such as shallow water and emergent vegetation that are essential for optimizing water quality polishing, can result in undesirable increases in mosquito production. The attraction of large numbers of birds to constructed wetlands could also increase the risk of transmission of mosquito-borne viral infections to humans in the vicinity of the wetland. The potential for conflict is typically highest in arid regions where natural mosquito populations have limited abundance and are found near newly urbanizing areas. The creation of wildlife habitat is a significant goal of many treatment wetlands. Humans are also welcome in many treatment wetlands for recreational and educational activities. Risks of disease transmission to humans and livestock as well as the inconvenience of mosquitoes as pests must be offset by the economic savings of inexpensive water quality enhancement and the resulting reduction in pollution that also poses a risk to society's health and well-being. Ecological risks associated with the use of mosquito control chemicals must be offset by the increased habitat benefits provided by these constructed wetlands. The right balance between these competing goals can be recognized by the design that provides the greatest net environmental and societal benefit. This paper describes these tradeoffs between mosquito control and the constructed wetland technology and provides a synthesis of information that can be used to optimize the benefits of these wetland systems. Basic research is recommended to better define the cost-effectiveness of the various design and management options.

AB - Constructed wetlands hold considerable promise for providing water quality and wildlife habitat benefits. At the same time, constructed wetlands have been described as "mosquito-friendly habitats" and may raise potential conflicts with neighboring human populations. Conflicts arise because some design features, such as shallow water and emergent vegetation that are essential for optimizing water quality polishing, can result in undesirable increases in mosquito production. The attraction of large numbers of birds to constructed wetlands could also increase the risk of transmission of mosquito-borne viral infections to humans in the vicinity of the wetland. The potential for conflict is typically highest in arid regions where natural mosquito populations have limited abundance and are found near newly urbanizing areas. The creation of wildlife habitat is a significant goal of many treatment wetlands. Humans are also welcome in many treatment wetlands for recreational and educational activities. Risks of disease transmission to humans and livestock as well as the inconvenience of mosquitoes as pests must be offset by the economic savings of inexpensive water quality enhancement and the resulting reduction in pollution that also poses a risk to society's health and well-being. Ecological risks associated with the use of mosquito control chemicals must be offset by the increased habitat benefits provided by these constructed wetlands. The right balance between these competing goals can be recognized by the design that provides the greatest net environmental and societal benefit. This paper describes these tradeoffs between mosquito control and the constructed wetland technology and provides a synthesis of information that can be used to optimize the benefits of these wetland systems. Basic research is recommended to better define the cost-effectiveness of the various design and management options.

KW - Constructed wetlands

KW - Mosquito abatement

KW - Wastewater treatment

KW - Water quality

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=2342516194&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=2342516194&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2003.11.001

DO - 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2003.11.001

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:2342516194

VL - 21

SP - 211

EP - 232

JO - Ecological Engineering

JF - Ecological Engineering

SN - 0925-8574

IS - 4-5

ER -