2.3. RESEARCH RESULTS: STATE PLANNING FOR CLIMATE CHANGE AND 
AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES 
In total, we reviewed 25 state plans (approved plans, plans pending approval, and draft 
plans), including 23 AlS-specific plans and two general invasive species management plans with 
a significant AIS focus. Several other states are currently developing AIS management plans, 
which we did not include in our review. We were also unable to include several recently 
approved state plans as they were not available at the time of analysis, including California’s, 
Idaho’s, and Rhode Island’s plans. In addition to the 25 state plans, we reviewed seven regional 
AIS plans. 
Table 2-1 summarizes how each state’s plan (1) addresses potential impacts resulting 
from climate change, (2) demonstrates capacity to adapt goals and activities to changing 
conditions, (3) provides monitoring strategies, (4) includes plans for periodic revision and update 
of the plan, and (5) describes funding sources/strategies for plan implementation. Within each 
category, several more specific questions were examined (see Appendix D for the list of 
questions under each category). For each question we assigned scores from 0 to 3. A score of 0 
meant that a plan had no evidence of capacity to address a particular question or set of activities. 
A score between 1 and 3 meant there was some level of capacity or potential for that state to 
incorporate and address information on and impacts from changing conditions, including climate 
change. 
Our assessment revealed that few plans incorporate climate change or the resultant 
change of conditions (see Appendix D, Complete Criteria and Scoring for State Plan 
Consideration of Climate Change and/or Changing Conditions for the full criteria and scoring). 
The majority of state plans have management actions that, if conducted under different 
environmental conditions, may prove less relevant, less efficient, or less successful than they are 
under current conditions. However, some states, such as Alaska, Hawaii, and Washington, 
recognize that conditions may change over time and have built considerations of changing 
conditions into their management actions. In addition, many state plans contain measures to 
periodically review and update management strategies and tasks, providing the opportunity to 
review the robustness of management plans in light of climate change and to amend plans where 
feasible. 
While most state plans do not mention climate change or changing conditions, our 
assessment of these plans does reveal that states have some capacity to adapt their program or 
activities (Table 2-1). The assessment results represent a potential adaptive capacity across 
different parts of each of the state’s program, which should make it easier for managers and 
decision-makers to address potential program vulnerabilities to climate change. The scores from 
answering each of the questions within each of the five categories assessed (impacts from 
2-4 
