| HWA
Responses |
James
Smith |
| Jun
11, 2007 21:30 PDT |
I've been writing to lots of park officials, government folk,
and
various "friends of" groups about the looming hemlock
extinctions.
The upshot is this:
They do not seem inclined to push for any wide used of
imadacloprid,
even as a time-buying tactic until a decent biological control
can be
initiated. I tell them that there are many willing folk to tromp
from
grove to grove, tree to tree, applying the adelgicide. Most of
them
reply that they are "monitoring" the situation. Which
is the same thing
as saying they're just going to watch the ecosystem collapse
without
doing anything about it. The Smokies folk seem quite pleased
with
themselves that they've treated a whopping 1,000 acres with
imadacloprid. Which is, I assume, Will's total effort.
I'm going to arrange another trip to Fall Creek Falls State Park
to see
those groves again before it's too late. The trees there are in
perfect,
untouched shape. Stunning. Those of you who haven't been
there---GO! |
| Re:
Responses. |
Edward
Frank |
| Jun
11, 2007 22:03 PDT |
James,
Perhaps you need to use stronger language. There isn't a choice
to
"monitor" the situation until a biological control
becomes available.
Monitoring means ALL OF THE HEMLOCKS WILL DIE.
The choices are:
A) Do nothing and all of the hemlocks will die causing the
greatest
ecological disaster to the eastern forests since the chestnut
blight of the
early 1900's. Entire ecosystems tied to the hemlock will be
destroyed with
many species extinctions. Monitoring the situation is simply a
less
pathetic sounding version of letting all the hemlocks die, with
exactly the
same result .
B) Treat now with imidacloprid and gain 4 to 5 years in which a
better and
more permanent solution can be found. There is potential in a
fungal
treatment based upon a milk byproduct as a medium.
C) There is no choice C. The only choices are letting the
hemlocks and
related ecosystems die, or treatment with imidacloprid
pesticide.
Monitoring means ALL OF THE HEMLOCKS WILL DIE and is not a
realistic option.
At the present time biological controls in the form of insect
releases have
not been effective.
I find that often people are too compromising to express their
points
effectively especially if the other party is not inclined to
listen.
Civility should not be lost, but the points may need to be
painted in sharp
black and white, and without any shades of gray.
Ed Frank
|
| RE:
Responses. |
Edward
Frank |
|
Jun
11, 2007 22:34 PDT |
James,
Ask the people with whom you are corresponding a couple of
simple
questions:
Do you want to see the Eastern Hemlock and Carolina Hemlock
become
functionally extinct across the entire eastern United States,
along with
the related collapse of a major ecosystem component of the
eastern forest or
not? Do you want to see all of the hemlocks die or do you want
to do
something about it?
If you want to do something about it then you should start a
treatment
program with imidacloprid immediately on as many trees as
possible, with
special focus on old growth remnants and exceptional groves.
If you want to see them all die, continue monitor the situation
while
thousands of acres of hemlocks continue to die with each passing
week.
Monitor the situation when treatment a few weeks or even days
earlier
would have saved exceptional pockets of hemlocks. Point out of
the top
fifteen tallest hemlocks ever accurately documented using modern
techniques,
most found within the past two years, 10 of them are dead. Nine
of these
were killed by HWA in the last year and most might have been
saved by
chemical treatment as late as last summer. All of the new finds
of tall or large
volume hemlocks are already dead from HWA. Half of the living
specimens
are in poor shape, and with treatment with imidacloprid they
potentially may
recover.
Ask how much more monitoring do you need to see the threat to
the
species?
Ed Frank
|
| Re:
Responses. |
hinto-@comcast.net |
| Jun
12, 2007 04:24 PDT |
James,
I spoke with the Forest Supervisor for Cherokee National Forest,
Mr Thomas Speaks, and he basically told me he wasn't much
interested in treating the old growth hemlocks in Citico Creek
Wilderness (Falls Branch) even though it would still be
consistent with the Wilderness Act as stated in the
Environmental Assessment. He referred me to the District Ranger
for the Tellico Ranger District, Keith Lannom, in Tellico
Plains. He was even less enthusiastic. He mostly just said
"no". Mr Speaks can be reached at 423.476.9700. His
email (the office) is mailroom_r-@fs.fed.us
and Mr Lannom can be reached at (423) 253-8400 but I don't know
his email. I assured Mr Lannom that a great number of voices
would make him re-think his position. How about giving these
guys a call?
Chuck |
| RE:
Responses. |
Will
Blozan |
| Jun
12, 2007 04:54 PDT |
James,
Just for the record, more than 90% of the NPS treatments (by
acreage) in the
Smokies has been in-house park service efforts. My company has
treated
around 110-120 acres under contract for the NPS.
However, the intensive efforts should have been started in 2002
when the bug
was first discovered. The short period of time that exists to
ACT is clearly
evident in the massive loss of hemlock forests already
documented in the
Smokies. I estimate that to make a significant impact- as in
sustaining the
forest as a functional, healthy ecosystem with minimal
ecological impacts-
imidacloprid treatments must be completed within three years of
first HWA
discovery. After that, I suspect major losses will occur and the
forest will
begin to transition to whatever replacement regime will follow.
The Smokies efforts are valiant, and great examples of forest
are being
preserved, but they are simply too late for much of the park.
Part of this
is due to the nature of the chemical itself taking so long to
take effect.
There are other faster acting insecticides but they pose a much
greater risk
to the environment and significant cost increases. Places like
Fall Creek
Falls have the opportunity to avoid the Smokies scenario
entirely. Whether
they do or not is up to the folks making the decisions.
Sometimes I wonder if they truly realize what is going to
happen. Like Ed
said, it is a black and white issue. No third option. Monitoring
and waiting
is not an option to me, as it accomplishes nothing. The wasted
money spent
on monitoring labor could save hundreds of trees with cheap and
effective
soil treatments.
Will
|
| Back
to Ed |
Robert
Leverett |
| Jun
12, 2007 05:29 PDT |
Ed,
Excellent analysis. Part of the problem is
that government officials
live in a world of forced compromises where there are no sharp
corners,
where everything is subject to manipulation and words lose their
true
meaning. You are right to remind us that we in ENTS must shoot
straight.
So here goes. THE CHIEF JAKE SWAMP WHITE PINE KICKS FANNY. Er,
uh, what
was it that we were talking about?
Bob
|
| Re:
Responses: Park Service and Forest Service Addresses and emails |
Edward
Frank |
| Jun
12, 2007 08:52 PDT |
|