| Previous digest | Subsequent digest |
Global Invasive Species Team listserve digest #124
Mon Feb 23 2004 - 15:30:18 PST
--CONTENTS--
1. Corrections to listserve #123 (Global, planet Earth)
2. Soil stabilization alternatives for Italian ryegrass (California, USA)
3. Session at Western Soc. of Weed Science meeting (Western states, USA)
4. Boiling water and Oxalis pes-caprae (California, USA)
5. The Center for Invasive Plant Management grants (Western States, USA)
6. Have you flamed plants? (Global, planet Earth)
7. Incorporating biodiversity impacts into state weed plans (Utah, USA)
8. Things learned at a weed science meeting (Indiana, planet Earth)
9. Invasive predator management survey (Nationwide, USA)
10. National Invasive Species Committee formed (Nationwide, Palau)
11. New Invasive Species Council formed (Pennsylvania, USA)
12. Hawaii to spend $40 megabucks on invasives (Hawai'i, USA)
13. Effects of vehicular traffic on weed spread (Global, planet Earth)
14. APHIS decisions on forest pests (Nationwide, USA)
---------------------------------------
1. Corrections to listserve #123 (Global, planet Earth)
From: Barry Rice (bamrice(at)ucdavis.edu)
There are few things that irritate me more than having to submit
corrections to this listserve. The last digest contained THREE errors!
Message #6 referred to a TV show to be broadcast on Saturday, March 1.
Astute readers noted there is no such day in 2004. Alas, the press release
I had been given was undated, ancient, and referred to a previous year!
HOWEVER, those who are itching to watch this show can buy it for $24.95
from: http://www.itvisus.com/programs/tech/press_silentinvaders.asp
Message #7 promised a good url regarding the use of vinegar as an
herbicide. I forgot to include it. As penance, I will include TWO:
http://wsprs.wsu.edu/VinegarFactSheet.pdf
http://www.hort.wisc.edu/mastergardener/Features/weeds/vinegar/vinegar.htm
(The latter url is very similar, but also includes a few nice links).
The third error, from another of the postings, is more subtle. I challenge
you to find it. Marilyn Jordan did!
---------------------------------------
2. Soil stabilization alternatives for Italian ryegrass (California, USA)
From: Richard Fitzgerald (rfitzgerald(at)dfg.ca.gov)
It has been common practice in private forest management to use Italian
ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum), seeded at 25-40 lbs/acre for soil
stabilization and erosion control. Due to its potential to persist in
wildlands, allelopathic characteristics, and other possible effects
towards competitive exclusion on native species, our program has been
recommending against its use. As alternatives, we have been recommending
regionally appropriate native plants or seeds, and/or non-native species
for initial erosion control or winterizing until native species establish,
the native species being the preferred alternative. When not available, we
have recommended the use of ephemeral cereal grasses such as barley
(Hordeum vulgare), buckwheat (Fagopyron esculentum), rye (Secale cereale),
and wheat (Triticum aestivum). A commercial product called Regreen®, a
sterile perennial wheat and wheatgrass hybrid, has also been suggested.
I have recently become involved in timber harvest review in Santa Cruz
County, and am looking for information regarding effectiveness of the
solutions mentioned above, alternatives, and sources and application
guidelines.
Foresters tell me that they are receptive to adopting these methods, but
they are not aware of reliable sources of materials (and neither am I).
As I am also interested in effective soil stabilization, I am interested
in knowing about the relative effectiveness of the alternatives. With
respect to the use of barleys, one forester has said that he is concerned
that the forage value of this species may attract wild pigs to sites where
erosion potential is high.
---------------------------------------
3. Session at Western Soc. of Weed Science meeting (Western states, USA)
From: Monica Pokorny, Center of Inv Plant Mgmt (mpokorny(at)montana.edu)
I am working with researchers in the West involved in invasive plant
inventory and monitoring. We are convinced that inventory and monitoring
methods should be chosen based on specific land management objectives. We
intend to develop a training manual and workshop that explains the
different inventory and monitoring methods available, and their advantages
and disadvantages. This will enhance the NAWMA Standards by providing
methods on how to survey and monitor plant populations in a way that can
lead to effective and feasible management. To help us with this, we must
first:
A)Identify land managers' invasive plant management objectives and
constraints so that our approach evaluation of inventory and monitoring
methods can be tailored to address these issues at various regional
scales; and
B)Review the state of the knowledge of inventory and monitoring methods
currently used to detect invasive species, review the status of acceptance
of these methods among land managers, critically assess their value
(advantages and disadvantages), and provide recommendations for the most
valid methods.
To get useful input from land managers, we hop you can join us at a
preliminary discussion on 9 March, 2004, 6-8pm in the Pikes Peak Room at
the Doubletree Hotel in Colorado Springs. Hors d'oeuvres will be served.
This meeting coincides with the Western Society of Weed Science which is
located in the same hotel.
---------------------------------------
4. Boiling water and Oxalis pes-caprae (California, USA)
From: Andrea Pickart (andrea_pickart(at)r1.fws.gov)
Can anyone give me feedback on using the Aquamaster trailer to dispense
boiling water on weeds? Does anyone use it? Have you used it in a sandy
substrate or even dunes? What species have you used it on? Will it be
effective on Oxalis pes-caprae, a bulb-producing perennial? How many
treatments were necessary?
A partner is also considering using solarization for Oxalis pes-caprae.
Any advice on clear vs. black plastic in our region (north coast of
California): when, how long, how successful?
---------------------------------------
5. The Center for Invasive Plant Management grants (Western States, USA)
From: Janet Clark (cipm(at)montana.edu
The Center for Invasive Plant Management is now accepting proposals for
research grants targeting invasive plants of concern in the western U.S.
The 2004 grant program seeks proposals in the areas of:
* Seed Money
* Innovations in Early Detection
* Information Synthesis and Assessment: Impacts of Invasive Plants
Program descriptions may be found at
http://www.weedcenter.org/grants/overview.html. Submission deadline is
March 24.
---------------------------------------
6. Have you flamed plants? (Global, planet Earth)
From: Ken Moore (ken(at)wildwork.org)
I have had great success using a propane torch to "cook" young French
broom seedlings (producing instant mortality) that come up by the
thousands in early spring after the standing mature broom has been pulled.
The technique is showing promise here for controlling poison hemlock as
well. I know this technique has long been used in agriculture, but I'd
like to hear from any of you who have tried it for wildland weed control,
which species you tried it on, at what growth stages, how effective it
was, etc. Any information you can give me will be most helpful. This will
be for an article I am be writing for publication on the potential of
flaming as a tool for controlling invasive plant species in wildland
settings.
---------------------------------------
7. Incorporating biodiversity impacts into state weed plans (Utah, USA)
From: Joel Peterson (jpeterson(at)tnc.org)
How have other TNC staff have taken biodiversity impacts into
consideration when developing their state weed plans? If you have any
suggestions, please contact me with your information. Also, send a cc
message to Elizabeth Sklad (esklad(at)tnc.org), too.
---------------------------------------
8. Things learned at a weed science meeting (Indiana, planet Earth)
From: Ellen Jacquart (ejacquart(at)tnc.org)
I wanted to share a few things I learned at last week's Weed Science
Society of America/North American Weed Management Association:
** National database: Tom Stohlgren (USGS) is developing a national
database for invasive plant species focused on taking selected data sets
from around the country and using them to predict spread of particular
invasive species. John Randall reports that NatureServe is still talking
about providing a national database on weed ranges, but there isn't
financial support for such an effort. The most promising database system
to hook into may well be the setup Mandy Tu has been working on with
TNC-Oregon.
** NAWMA standard: This standard for the collection of invasive plant
species information is now called the North American Invasive Plant
Mapping Standard.
** Cool but scary statistics on federal land: Rob Hedburg of WSSA provided
information on some estimates regarding invasive plant species on federal
land:
Current % infestation of federal lands: 5% (doesn't sound too bad...)
Current acres infestation of federal lands: 35 million acres!! (700
million acres total x 5%)
Estimated rate of expansion: 5-15% per year; at this rate of expansion,
acreage infested doubles roughly every 9 years. That means by 2040 well
over 50% of federal land could be infested.
** TNC is a player: There wasn't a single talk at the meeting that didn't
mention TNC. The Wildland Weeds site was mentioned repeatedly as the best
source of information for practitioners, our government relations products
summarizing legislation were handed out to all for the number of people we
have devoted to this issue, we (ok, the Wildland Invasive Species Team)
have made a pretty big impact and are providing good information that is
getting used by everybody from county weed board supervisors to policy
guys in WSSA and NAWMA.
---------------------------------------
9. Invasive predator management survey (Nationwide, USA)
From: Gregor Schuurman (gschuurman(at)usgs.gov)
I work with the U.S. Geological Survey's Biological Resource Division in
Hawai'i. We are conducting a review of the use of decision support (DS)
tools and methodologies in the management of invasive predators worldwide.
We are interested in the use of any DS tools, from low-tech decision trees
and paper-based matrices to computer-based models. We would like to
survey as many people and organizations involved in invasive predator
management as possible, to get a clear picture of the prevalence and
variation in the use of DS approaches.
Because we are interested in assessing the prevalence of DS tools and
methodologies, feedback from management organizations that DO NOT have a
formal decision support system is as valuable as feedback from those that
do. Our focus is limited to invasive predators (vertebrates or
invertebrates).
Our four brief questions are below. On the basis of answers to these
initial questions I may contact you once more with additional, more
specific questions.
**Your name and contact information, and the name of your organization and
office?
**Does your organization use decision support tools or methodologies for
invasive predator management?
**If not, what informal rules or approaches do you use to make invasive
predator management decisions?
**Can you suggest other people within your organization and/or other
organizations within your area that might be able to provide this sort of
information?
---------------------------------------
10. National Invasive Species Committee formed (Nationwide, Palau)
From: Joel Miles (jmiles(at)palau-oerc.net)
There is good news for Palau's environment and economy with the creation
of the National Invasive Species Committee. The National Environmental
Protection Council (NEPC) created the Invasive Species Committee in its
regular meeting on January 21st. The creation of the committee is one
outcome of an Invasive Species Prevention Course held in Palau in August
2003. The participants in this course represented government and private
agencies, companies, and organizations with an interest in invasive
species issues in Palau.
One of the main recommendations from the participants in the course was
that there be a single governmental body to coordinate all invasive
species in Palau. This recommendation was brought to the NEPC, which
endorsed it and forwarded it to the President, who then directed the NEPC
to take this responsibility. In response, the NEPC has formed the
Invasive Species Committee. The committee's primary responsibility will
be to develop a national strategy to prevent and manage invasive species,
and to coordinate invasive species efforts in Palau.
For a copy of NEPC Resolution #2 which created the Invasive Species
Committee, and the Stakeholder Recommendations on which the resolution is
based, please contact me.
---------------------------------------
11. New Invasive Species Council formed (Pennsylvania, USA)
From: Ronald Ramsey (rramsey(at)tnc.org)
On January 27, Pennsylvania Governor Rendell signed Executive Order
2004-1, which creates an Invasive Species Council to advise and direct the
Governor on the development and implementation of a State invasive species
management plan and provide guidance on prevention, control, and rapid
response initiatives and coordination among federal, state, regional and
local efforts. The Secretary of Agriculture will chair the council, which
also will include DCNR, DEP, Health, PennDOT, Fish and Boat Commission,
Game Commission and 10 members of the public representing agriculture and
natural resource organizations and educational institutions involved in
invasives research.
This is great stuff...and it addresses one of our chapter's annual goals!
Kudos to Betsy Lyman and Joanne Steinhart (and others!) for their good
efforts in helping to make this Council a reality.
---------------------------------------
12. Hawai'i to spend $40 megabucks on invasives (Hawaii, USA)
From: Alenka Remec (aremec(at)tnc.org)
(Alenka forwarded us an excerpt from the State of the State Address
Governor Linda Lingle (Hawai'i) gave on 26 January. Her proposal to
tackle the challenge of invasive species is subject to legislative
approval.)
"Too often attempts at stewardship have been reactive rather than
proactive. That is why this Administration is pledging to spend $20
million over the next four years to tackle the challenge of invasive
species. This program is unprecedented in scope and scale. A lack of
preventive action against invasive species has resulted in disastrous
ecological consequences. The danger of continued inaction cannot be
overemphasized.... The $5 million annually we are proposing will support
Hawai'i's Invasive Species Council in its efforts to eradicate existing
problems and prevent new species from arriving on our shores. It is
important to note that this money will be doubled by matching funds from
the federal government as well as private sources. This means
approximately $40 million will be spent to tackle the problem over the
next four years."
The complete speech can be viewed at:
http://www.hawaii.gov/gov/Folder.2004-01-25.3503/
Speech.2004-01-25.3533/speech_view
(paste those lines together to make a single link)
---------------------------------------
13. Effects of vehicular traffic on weed spread (Global, planet Earth)
From: Tunyalee Martin (tamorisawa(at)ucdavis.edu)
Roads and vehicular travel are often cited as potentially aiding the
spread of invasive species into wildlands. However, this is actually
surprisingly underdocumented in the literature. For your reference below I
have summarized papers I have found and that others have sent to us that
are related to this. If you know of a paper I have missed, please tell me
about it! (Thanks in particular to Dave Carr who provided us many of the
references.)
**Adams, J.A., A.S. Endo, L.H. Stolzy, R.G. Rowlands, and H.B. Johnson.
1982. Controlled experiments on soil compaction produced by off-road
vehicles in the Mojave Desert, California. Journal Applied Ecology
19:167-175.
A controlled experiment found that the introduced, fibrous-rooted grass,
Schismus barbatus, had significantly higher cover in areas with soil
compaction by vehicles as compared to unimpacted areas.
**Angold, P.G. 1997. The impact of a road upon adjacent heathland
vegetation: effects on plant species composition. Journal of Applied
Ecology 34:409-417.
In England, Angold found a relationship between vegetation changes along
roads and vehicular pollution. These heathland changes extended 200m on
each side of the road and included a decrease in lichen and Calluna
vulgaris (a native heather), and an increase of the grass, Molinia
caerulea. Nitrogen oxides from vehicle emissions increased nitrogen
availability, increasing the herbivore attacks on heathland vegetation and
competitive ability of M. caerulea.
**Amor, R.L. and P.L. Stevens. 1976. Spread of weeds from a roadside into
sclerophyll forests at Dartmouth, Australia. Weed Research 16:111-118.
As the distance increased from an old road, the frequency of alien plants
in forests declined.
**Clifford, H.T. 1959. Seed dispersal on motor vehicles. Journal of
Ecology 75:311-315.
Mud collected from vehicle undersurfaces in Nigeria was potted to
determine plant seed germination. The range of species and germination
rates depended partly on the collection season (during the rainy season
vs. start of the dry season). The soil texture determined the number of
seedlings present, with loamy sand containing more than sandy loam. Most
of the seedlings from mud under cars were of common roadside plants.
Species with small seeds had a better chance of dispersal through mud
under vehicles.
**Defenders of Wildlife. 2002. The impacts of off-road vehicles and roads
on wildlife and habitat in Florida's National Forests. Defenders of
Wildlife, Washington, D.C., available at
http://www.defenders.org/habitat/florvs/.
This online report addresses off-road vehicles and the introduction of
exotic species. A few examples are sprinkled throughout the report such
as cogongrass (Imperata cylindrica) dispersal and an observation of
increasing abundance of St. John's wort (Hypericum perforatum) due to
off-road vehicles. A small section in the report focused on exotic
species introductions; examples included plants (knapweed spp, Schinus
terebinthifolius, Melaleuca quinquenervia, Lygodium microphyllum, Sapium
sebiferum, L. japonicum, and Melinis repens), a mosquito (Aedes), and an
exotic root fungus of cedars. (Note that unlike the other papers
summarized here, the document from Defenders of Wildlife was not a
peer-reviewed, scientific publication.)
**Frenkel, R.E. 1970. Ruderal vegetation along some California roadsides.
University of California Press, Berkeley, California. 163 pp.
Frenkel presents characteristics and habitat of ruderal vegetation in
California. Roadside vegetation floristic characteristics were related to
regional differences. Also discussed were plant dispersal and ecological
response to blading, trampling, and herbicide application.
**Gelbard, J.L. and S. Harrison. 2003. Roadless habitats as refuges for
native grasslands: interactions with soil, aspect, and grazing. Ecological
Applications 13(2): 404-415.
The authors determined that roadless grasslands provided refuge for native
Californian bunchgrasses such as Nassella pulchra and Poa secunda. As the
distance from roads increased the percentage cover of native species, the
percentage of native species, and the number of native grasses increased.
In contrast, exotic species cover and the number of exotic forb species
decreased as distance from roads increased. Interestingly, no difference
was observed in serpentine soils. The results suggest that on
nonserpentine soils, exotics such as Aegilops triuncialis, Centaurea
solstitialis, Convolvulus arvensis, and Polypogon monspeliensis were
continuing to spread while natives declined.
**Gilbertson, D. 1983. The impacts of off-road vehicles in the Coorong
Dune and Lake Complex of South Australia. In R.H. Webb and H.G. Wilshire,
(eds). Environmental Effects of Off-Road Vehicles: Impacts and Management
in Arid Regions. Springer-Veriag, New York. P. 366.
This chapter is primarily about the geomorphic (coastal dune drift) and
ecological impacts (plant and animal life) of off-road vehicles, but it
briefly mentioned how non-native weeds were the primary colonists in areas
where off-road vehicle use was present but low compared to more intensely
used areas such as preferred camping grounds.
**Greenberg, C.H., S.H. Crownover and D.R. Gordon. 1997. Roadside soils: a
corridor for invasion of xeric scrub by non-indigenous plants. Natural
Areas Journal 17(2):99-109.
In this Florida study, the authors suggest that disturbance alone may not
increase the presence invasive species, but that a change in soil
characteristics through the addition of clay and limerock from road
construction may enhance invasion.
**Lonsdale, W.M. and A.M. Lane. 1994. Tourist vehicles as vectors of weed
seeds in Kakadu National Park, northern Australia. Biological Conservation
69:277-283.
The outer surfaces of cars were vacuumed and mud in wheel arches and tires
were collected. Approximately half (52%) the cars were carrying seeds,
with the overall mean being 5.95 seeds per car. However, three cars in
the study were carrying large reproductive units (fruit and a panicle). By
excluding these three extreme outliers, the mean fell to 2.51 seeds per
car. Of the approximately 63 species of plants found as seeds,
approximately 47 were grasses
**Milberg, P. and B.B. Lamont. 1995. Fire enhances weed invasion of
roadside vegetation in southwestern Australia. Biological Conservation
73:45-49.
A common management practice in Australia is to burn roadside vegetation.
The authors determined that early-successional, non-native plants spread
into burned sclerophyll woodland from roadsides and that native species
decreased. The most abundant weeds were grasses, which are likely to
increase the vulnerability of the vegetation to additional fire, and
further invasions.
**Muhlenbach, V. 1979. Contributions to the synanthropic (adventive) flora
of the railroads in St. Louis, Missouri, U.S.A. Annals of the Missouri
Botanical Garden 66(1):1-108.
From 1954 to 1971, both native and non-native plants were observed
alongside Missouri railroads. While some were ephemeral, 89 had
established stable populations. Nanism (dwarfism) characterized many of
the flora along railroads. This article contains many references to
others of the same type in a thorough literature review. An extensive
table lists the author's findings.
**Schmidt, W. 1989. Plant dispersal by motor vehicles. Vegetatio 80:
147-152.
In a study in Germany, Schmidt recorded 3926 seedlings and 124 species
from mud samples scraped from the undersides of a car. Grass species and
those plants with smaller seeds were most common. Thirty percent of the
seedlings identified were Poa annua. Ninety four percent of the seedlings
belonged to 34 species that are common along roadsides. However, Schmidt
suggested that, as with previous literature, there was only a weak
relationship between the frequency of roadside plant propagules found in
mud samples and the corresponding roadside plants.
**Spellerberg, I.F. 1998. Ecological effects of roads and traffic: a
literature review. Global Ecology and Biogeography Letters 7: 317-333.
Spellerberg surveyed the literature and summarized the ecological effects
of roads and traffic. Two sections of interest include: 1) roads,
fragmentation and invasive plant species and 2) traffic and dispersal of
plant species. The references in these two sections cover the effects of
roads and traffic in the US, New Zealand, Australia and Britain.
**Stebbins, R.C. 1974. Off-road vehicles and the fragile desert. The
American Biology Teacher, National Association of Biology Teachers
36(4,5):203-208;294-304.
This paper on off-road vehicle use in the California desert mentions that
vehicles increased alien plant species. It is interesting that this was
being studied as far back as 1974! The paper includes nice pictures of
the reduction in plants from off-road vehicle damage.
**Trombulak, S. C. and C. A. Frissell 2000. Review of ecological effects
of roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conservation Biology
14(1): 18-30.
This paper reviewed the scientific literature on the effects of roads and
includes a short section on the spread of exotic species by roads through
three mechanisms: habitat disturbance, the stressing or displacement of
native species, and easier movement by wild or human vectors. This is a
good source for literature on the subject.
**Tyser, RW. and C.A. Worley. 1992. Alien flora in grasslands adjacent to
road and trail corridors in Glacier National Park, Montana (USA).
Conservation Biology 6(2):253-262.
In Glacier National Park, Montana, the authors determined that alien
species were successfully invading fescue grassland sites from primary
roads, secondary roads, and back country trails.
**Wace, N. 1977. Assessment of dispersal of plant species - the car-borne
flora in Canberra. Exotic Species in Australia - their establishment and
success. D. Anderson (editor) Volume 10 Proceedings of the Ecological
Society of Australia. Symposium Adelaide, May 19-20, 1977.
Car-wash sludge from automatic car-washing establishments was potted in
glasshouses to determine plant species carried by cars. The number of
germinated seedlings was 18,566 over 2 years and 259 species. Exotic
seedlings (86 seedlings and 19 species) were also observed. The author
concluded that using the sludge underestimated the number and species
carried on cars.
**Zink, T.A., M.F. Allen, B. Heindl-Tenburen, and E.B. Allen, 1995. The
effect of a disturbance corridor on an ecological reserve. Restoration
Ecology 3:304-310.
A greater number of exotic annuals (including Bromus rubens, B. diandrus,
B. mollis, Avena barbata, and Brassica nigra) than native species were
observed near a constructed pipeline corridor in southern California. The
exotics appeared to be moving into nearby native grasslands, coastal sage,
and oak woodlands.
---------------------------------------
14. APHIS decisions on forest pests (Nationwide, USA)
From: Faith Campbell (phytodoer(at)aol.com)
I am belatedly sending announcements about 3 decisions APHIS has made with
regard to introduced forest pests and pathogens, or imports of items that
could vector the same. If you cannot obtain these notices from the APHIS
web site, contact me and I will try to find them for you.
Decision 1: In December, APHIS released an environmental assessment (EA)
and approved launch of programs aimed at controlling the emerald ash
borer(EAB) in thirteen counties in southern Michigan. As far as I know,
APHIS made no effort to inform people that the EA had been released. You
may find the pdf file at:
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/ES/pdf%20files/mieabea.pdf
The text of the EA is only 15 pages long, and every topic is covered quite
briefly. I found the document quite confusing when it attempted to explain
the differences between their options B and C. Option C is an integrated
eradication program that will use a variety of actions, including surveys,
tree removal/chipping, and pesticide applications (primarily
Imidacloprid). My major concerns are that the EA seems to me to downplay
the difficulty in detecting EAB and questions about the efficacy of the
chemicals.
Decision 2: APHIS has approved importation of penjing (bonsai) plants from
China that are in approved growing media. The Federal Register notice
appeared on January 16, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 11). Imports are limited
to the five species evaluated in the risk assessment; APHIS had originally
proposed to allow imports of entire genera based on the risk assessment.
APHIS also updated the 1996 risk assessments and added a discussion of
risk management options. Under this final rule, penjing plants of the five
approved species may be imported in specified types of growing media as
long as:
*the plants are grown in accordance with written agreements between APHIS
and the Chinese plant protection service and between the Chinese plant
protection service and the grower;
*the plants are rooted and grown in a greenhouse that meets certain
requirements for pest exclusion and that is used only for plants being
grown in compliance with these regulations;
*the seeds or parent plants are obtained from approved sources and grown
out or treated in accordance with the regulations;
*water is from approved sources; benches must be approved heights; and the
plants must
be stored and packaged under approved conditions; and
*the plants must be inspected in the greenhouse and found free of evidence
of plant pests no more than 30 days prior to the exportation of the
plants.
These conditions include requirements that the plants be treated with
appropriate pesticides at least once every 10 days or as needed for 3
months before shipping to maintain a pest-free condition.
Decision 3: APHIS has approved importation of wood chips made from
temperate species of Eucalyptus grown in plantations in South America if
the chips are treated with a surface pesticide prior to importation. The
Federal Register notice appeared on January 15, 2004 (Volume 69, Number
10). This decision has been the most rapid of any rule change in my
experience; the proposal was published in September. Furthermore, the new
measures went into effect immediately upon publication of the Federal
Register notice.
Under the regulations in effect since 1995, approved treatments for
temperate wood chips are fumigation with methyl bromide, heat treatment,
and heat treatment with moisture reduction. These are described as
impractical for application to large volumes of wood chips. APHIS believes
that it is necessary to provide an effective, alternative treatment option
for those wishing to import larger shipments of wood chips to produce wood
pulp for paper. APHIS cites successful use of the surface pesticide in
treating chips from plantation-grown Pinus radiata from Chile. APHIS
states that companies have expressed active interest in importing large
quantities of temperate Eucalyptus chips which apparently explains the
rapidity of its decision.
The September proposal also considered changing requirements for chips
from tropical species of Eucalyptus grown in plantations in South America.
Under the regulations in effect since 1995, tropical wood chips from
healthy, plantation-grown trees may be imported without treatment, but
must be consigned to a facility operating under a compliance agreement.
APHIS continues to consider requiring more restrictive measures for wood
chips of tropical species of Eucalyptus. Until the agency makes a final
determination, the existing regulations remain in effect. Wood chips of
tropical species of Eucalyptus are currently being imported under the
compliance agreement procedure.
My check of import data compiled by the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service
shows the following imports of wood chips from South America:
Imports of softwood chips: 40,434 metric tons dry weight in 1998; 0 for
several years; **1,277 metric tons dry weight in 2002; and 15,102 metric
tons in 2003. The 2003 chips are Pinus radiata from Chile. I am not sure
at present the origin of the 1998 chips other than they did not come from
Chile.
**Imports of hardwood chips: 1,277 metric tons dry weight in 2002, 16,855
tons in 2003. Brazil was the country of origin of 14,792 metric tons in
2003; Uruguay shipped a mere 24 metric tons. I have not determined the
country of origin for the remaining 2,000 metric tons. It is not clear
that all these hardwood chips are Eucalyptus.