LBAM Lawsuit Filed Seeking CEQA Compliance

[bpm4327]

LBAM Lawsuit Filed Seeking CEQA Compliance

1/21/10 - The state's attack on the potentially crop-threatening light brown apple moth and its mating pattern in Davis has come under legal attack from environmentalists.

In a lawsuit filed Tuesday, two Northern California groups want to stop the state's agriculture department from using a chemical sexual attractant to disrupt the male moth's pursuit of the female.

A lawyer for the Pesticide Watch Education Fund out of Sacramento and San Francisco and the Davis group called Better Urban Green Strategies (BUGS) said he doesn't know for sure what sort of environmental threat the substance called pheromone might present. Rather, attorney Donald B. Mooney said, the state's exemption of itself from California Environmental Quality Act review is an abuse of the process.

"All the lawsuit seeks is that they comply with CEQA before they initiate the program," Mooney said.

Prompted by lawsuits, the California Department of Food and Agriculture in 2008 canceled an aerial spraying program in Monterey and Santa Cruz counties. Hundreds of residents in the two counties had complained of asthma attacks and other physical problems.

Since then, the agency has fastened the 9-inch, pheromone-laced twist ties on trees and other objects in 12 other counties to interrupt the moth's life cycle.

CDFA spokesman Steve Lyle said Wednesday the agency's lawyers couldn't comment on the suit. He said the program under way in Napa, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, Alameda, San Joaquin, Contra Costa, San Mateo, San Francisco, Marin, Santa Clara and Solano counties hasn't caused any environmental damage. "It's been effective," Lyle said.

According to the agency, the moth first popped up in Berkeley in 2006 and resulted in a 182-square-mile agricultural quarantine. The insect feeds on as many as 2,042 plants, including berry bushes, grapes, stone fruit trees and other products in California's multibillion-dollar agricultural industry.

"We know in the Watsonville area (in Santa Cruz County), it's done significant damage to the berry crops there," Lyle said.

The Sacramento Superior Court lawsuit filed by Mooney questioned how much damage the moth has really done in California. It said that the moth has been in California "a very long time" and with "no documented damage."

Plaintiffs assert there are other ways to attack the insect, such as with rival insect predators such as wasps and flies that lay their eggs in and kill moth larvae.

The suit said the state needs to review the Davis program in conjunction with all the other pheromone projects.

"They're piecemealing all these little projects, Davis included," Mooney said.

No hearing date has yet been set on the suit.

News article:
http://www.sacbee.com/business/story/2477375.html

[bpm4327]

Moth Hoopla - What's With The $100 Million LBAM Deal?

What's the big $100 million deal over a minor pest?

1/15/10 - By Annie Spiegelman - How is it, in a time of immense fiscal crisis, that an eradication program designed to clear out an otherwise ordinary and humdrum brown moth has come to cost California taxpayers over $100 million, and has garnered media attention that would have the Balloon Boy's dad puking with envy? When a bland, garden-variety moth, which many horticultural experts believe has been in the 'hood for years and is responsible for only minimal crop damage, steals the spotlight, it's time to do some 'splaining. So I clipped on my Master Gardener trowel-shaped lapel pin and gave the senior entomology faculty at the University of California, Davis a jingle to see why my tax dollars were being used to stamp out the lackluster light brown apple moth (LBAM). Here's a recap of the moth madness:

In Feb. 2007, a retired entomologist found a single light brown apple moth in his East Bay garden. By that summer, major LBAM populations had been found in the Monterey area. In an attempt to quickly stop the spread of this leaf-eating moth, the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) declared a state of emergency. This action released them from conducting a required environmental impact report in advance of spraying the area with pesticides. For several nights Monterey and Santa Cruz populations were aerially sprayed from 8pm to the early morning hours with bio-pesticide pheromone products. The aerial spraying was planned to occur for a few days each month over the next few years in San Francisco, Marin, Monterey and various East Bay cities. Many outraged citizens, city councils and a coalition of 90 public interest groups, including Marin's MOMAS (Mothers of Marin Against the Spray), immediately organized an effective campaign to stop further spraying in the Bay Area.

This impassioned cry from concerned citizens prompted California Secretary of Agriculture A.G. Kawamura to temporarily cancel the planned aerial spraying of other counties throughout the state. The original spraying in the Santa Cruz area was followed by hundreds of reported human illnesses, 650 seabird deaths and the unexplained deaths of pets and farm animals. The EPA has since revoked approval of CheckMate LBAM-F, the product that was used in the aerial spraying. "We are strongly opposed to the CDFA's entire moth eradication program. Times have changed, and the old methods of releasing chemicals and pesticides throughout the environment, which puts our health in danger, must be stopped," said Carolyn Cohan, a spokeswoman for MOMAS. "We must look to the future in sustainable ways that won't harm the environment, animals and our children."

To win over an irate and skeptical public, the CDFA hired a public relations powerhouse and spent $3 million to produce an advertising campaign titled "Hungry Pests," criticized as cheesy and fear-mongering by spray opponents. One ad warns that the brown moth could have significant long-term environmental and agricultural impact statewide, devastating our redwood forests and farms. At the same time, James Carey, professor and former vice chair of the Department of Entomology at UC Davis, and his colleagues Frank Zalom, a UC Davis professor and fellow at the California Academy of Science, and Bruce Hammock, professor of entomology at the Davis Cancer Research Center, sent a letter to Gov. Schwarzenegger expressing their concern with the planned moth eradication program. Their arguments focused on two primary points:

• the data supporting the argument that the moth would become more economically important than other tortricid leafrollers that are already in the state is unconvincing;

• there is no scientific evidence that using the method of mating disruption via pheromones either alone or with augmentative methods is capable of eradicating any insect population.

Harrumph!

I phoned Carey to ask him why he and his pack of vociferous overachievers were being such spoilsports. "The light brown apple moth should not be on a 'Class A' list. This is not a serious pest. And even if it was a more serious pest, there is zero chance to eradicate it," said Carey. "Not a small chance or minuscule chance, but basically zero. Eradication is not possible because you're not eradicating an LBAM population but you're trying to eradicate 100,000 LBAM populations. There are millions of pockets of these and each pocket has a separate population. It's similar to cancer. Every little metastasis can regenerate the population. Anything short of 100 percent effectiveness is control, not eradication."

As a result of the controversy surrounding aerial spraying, the present plan of action by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the CDFA is to add pheromone-saturated twist-ties and small amounts of lower-risk pesticides applied to poles and trees in parks and urban areas over the next three to five years. According to the environmental law firm EarthJustice, the product label of the chemical used in the twist-ties warns that the pheromone can be harmful if absorbed through skin and can cause eye irritation. It may also be toxic to aquatic life, dangerous to birds as well as domestic animals and other moths or butterflies. The twist-ties also contain "inert" ingredients that haven't been disclosed to the public. "I'm a naturally optimistic person, but I really feel—after listening to countless scientists and doctors and seeing so many sick kids recently—that we are quickly going over a toxic cliff in our country," says Debbie Friedman, a GreenWave Strategies consultant and chair of MOMAS. "As parents, we have a moral obligation to our children and to future generations. Last year, when MOMAS helped stop the spraying of chemicals from airplanes, several people told us that no group or person had ever stopped an aerial spraying. But Californians rose up like they hadn't in decades and it was stopped."

Marin pediatrician Michelle Perro has concerns about the products planned for the eradication program. "The amount of pesticides taken in by children is much greater than adults because of their unique physiology and behavior. New research shows that even minute amounts of pesticides can cause significant health changes in the areas of immunology, neurocognitive functioning and other serious heath risks," says Perro.

Minimal aerial spraying is still planned in forested areas along with a release of millions of irradiated sterile moths. Carey, who has been working with exotic pests since 1980 and was a key scientist in the decades-old battle against the Mediterranean fruit fly, believes the ill-conceived strategy of sterilizing millions of moths by radiation in a laboratory and then setting them free to mate, is deeply flawed. He says it has failed in the past to eradicate most of the pests on which it has been tested. The sterilization strategy will cost an estimated $10 million a year by itself, after the construction of a $35 million rearing facility in Moss Landing. "This pest cannot be eradicated. This is a huge undertaking where you end up with a moth population reduction in one area and then you go to the next and you have resurgence in the one you just left."

Who Did The Light Brown Apple Moth Sleep With To Get The Starring Role?

LBAM (Epiphyas postvittana) is a moth native to Australia that moseyed over to New Zealand and Hawaii over 100 years ago. When Roy Upton's team at Citizens for Health, a science-based public health and environmental organization, contacted horticultural experts in Australia, New Zealand, Hawaii and the UK, where the moth is widespread, the response was unanimous and went something like this: Why are you asking us about such an insignificant insect? Quit bugging us. We've got bigger fish to fry!

Daniel Harder, botanist and former executive director of the arboretum at UC Santa Cruz, says the folks at HortResearch in New Zealand (the Kiwi's version of the USDA), have devised effective protocols for controlling LBAM to zero-tolerance levels necessary to meet restrictions for export of crops to the United States. "These are classic IPM [integrated pest management] strategies of careful monitoring," says Harder, who traveled there in 2008 on a fact-finding mission meeting with government, agricultural and horticultural entomologists and researchers. New Zealand has a similar climate to California, along with many common crops and fauna. His 2008 study reports that in the 1980s, when regular applications of "broad-spectrum organophosphate" pesticides were used, the moth was considered a problem pest in New Zealand orchards. These pesticides have short- and long-term risks from exposure and long-term persistence in the environment. They also wipe out a plethora of beneficial insects that are natural predators and parasites to many pests. Unfortunately, insects aren't as oblivious as we'd like them to be and populations of them, including the LBAM, developed resistance to the pesticides. When the broad-spectrum pesticides were stopped in 2001, the beneficial insects returned to chow down on a variety of leafrollers (a horticultural term used for various caterpillars). Since then, with careful monitoring by sticky traps and a well-timed, target-specific, naturally based insecticide, LBAM has been reduced to a minor pest. Ta-da! Now the moth sits on a New Zealand film set, in a damp and dank holding area with all the other movie extras, sipping cold coffee and chatting nonstop about upgrading to a stand-in.

New Zealand entomological researchers also note that using pheromones placed throughout the state will only work under specific conditions:

• Extensive, even and complete coverage of the pheromone

• Uniform blocks of a single crop

• Uniform topography (no slopes, hills or valleys)

• Low population density of target pest (not too concentrated)

This will be difficult to achieve in California's 23,000 square miles of diverse terrain where the moth is now established. Some experts believe the pest has already been here for at least 10 years. To make matters worse, New Zealand research entomologist Peter Shaw asserts that a broadcast of pheromones around the state would not be effective because female moths issue a more concentrated scent plume than the dispersed scent of an aerial spray application or twist-tie and they can modify (evolve and reinforce) their scent, so male moths would still be able to find the females.

Sigh. Manipulative moths. Just what we need.

It's not just the ongoing costs to the California taxpayers, questionable safety, unknown long-term health risks and disputed efficacy in trying to eliminate this moth that's at stake here. Family farms—both conventional and organic—as well as independently owned nurseries have also been greatly affected by imposed government quarantines, inspections and forced applications of pesticides. One California grower, who chose to remain anonymous, reported losing more than $30,000 to comply with the LBAM quarantine regulations. Another explained that if he took all the different leafrollers he'd found in his nursery in the last three years and put them all on one plant, they would have done about $20 worth of damage. As one commented, "Our government's efforts should be going to trading partner negotiations to de-list all leafrollers across the national and international trading boards just like the EU has done. The USDA's quarantines are hurting California farmers more than the moth is." According to entomologist Zalom, the damage that occurs in commercial settings is manageable through careful monitoring, cultural approaches and low-risk pesticides—similar to how other widespread leafroller species are controlled. "The moth can indeed damage crops and ornamental plants, and we've seen evidence in a few blackberry and raspberry fields, nurseries and landscape plantings in the Monterey Bay area," says Zalom. "Naturally occurring biological control agents will become increasingly important for control. I believe LBAM will eventually be considered an occasional pest that growers need to be aware of and one, which on occasion, will require intervention. It seems to be no greater a threat than a suite of other insect pests that already occur locally. A reasonable approach would be to reconsider the eradication program."

Why are the USDA and CDFA carrying on their crusade against this particular moth? The general consensus in the entomological community is that the eradication plan is not "science based" but based on trade issues and unrealistic restrictions that need to be updated and revised. Some even refer to the eradication program as "Smoke and Mirrors" or "Wag the Moth." Carey suggests getting the University of California involved in the early stages of decision making and not just on technical advisory panels. There are 150 ecologists at UC Davis alone. There are over 1,000 ecologists and independent scientists across the UC system, many of them National Academy of Sciences members and elite scientists who would be willing to brainstorm on how best to deal with exotic pests. They could provide scientific strategies and techniques that are contemporary, precise and objective before a costly eradication program has been launched.

How Do We Demote This Moth From A Class A Pest (Lead Actor) To A Class C Pest (Movie Extra/Doughnut Eater)?

Last month, Marin's state Assemblymember Jared Huffman sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack on behalf of people, farms and businesses of the North Bay. He questioned, along with credible independent scientists and community leaders, if LBAM warranted eradication and if eradication is even possible. He referred to the recent independent study conducted by the National Academy of Sciences, which concluded that USDA's Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service should revise its response with "more robust science to support its position" and to "more clearly articulate the justification for its actions." In his letter, Huffman writes, "To continue implementing a program that lacks a solid scientific foundation and cannot achieve its stated goal, would be a very costly charade."

"We're extremely gratified that Assemblymember Huffman wrote to Secretary Vilsack asking him to declassify the moth and terminate the eradication program in the absence of scientific justification," says Debbie Friedman of MOMAS. "We are asking our government officials to live up to their promise to make policy decisions based upon science. I think that many Americans think that 'someone else will take care of it.' But I've learned firsthand that our elected officials need to hear from us often. When they hear from large numbers of people, they will listen. The number one action for people to take is to call Secretary Vilsack. He has the power to declassify the moth."

Who Ya Gonna Call?

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack at 301/734-5356; ask for Deborah McPartlan or leave a voicemail asking to "reclassify the light brown apple moth."

If you have the time, also contact:

• House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at 415/556-4862

• State Senator Mark Leno at 415/479-6612

• Representative Lynn Woolsey at 415/507-9554.

Ask them to tell the USDA to reclassify the moth.

Extra Credit & A Gold Star:

Email MOMAS, mothersofmarin@yahoo.com, and ask to be added to their email list for periodic LBAM updates and action alerts.

Pesticides Apps!

With pesticide-linked diseases such as cancer, Parkinson's, diabetes and autism at historic highs, Pesticide Action Network (http://www.panna.org ) has recently released its new iPhone app, "What's On My Food?" Just type in a food, such as "apples," and this app will show you which pesticides are found on conventionally grown apples, in what amount and what health effects are associated with exposure to each chemical. "This tool gives shoppers easy access to information on pesticides that's been buried deep in government reports for years," says Kristin Schafer, senior policy analyst at Pesticide Action Network. "Shoppers can make healthy choices for their families that also help move the whole food system in the right direction."

To Download This iPhone App, Go To:
http://www.whatsonmyfood.org/iphoneapp.jsp .

Be a Class A pest to Annie at Annie@dirtdiva.com.

News article:
http://www.pacificsun.com/story.php?story_id=3668