| Section One: Administration |
 |
|
|
 |
| Administrator's view |
|
I’m very impressed by the number of projects documented in this report, their quality and level of success. Others have noticed too. This year the Oregon Invasive Species Council (OISC) gave the state an “A-” ranking, the highest ever, for activities related to keeping harmful invasive species out of the state—a primary function of our division. In addition, two of our employees (Dave Langland and Jim LaBonte) were recognized by the OISC for individual awards for “going above and beyond the call of duty to keep new invaders out of the state.” Dave and Jim join eight other Plant Division staff members who have been similarly recognized since 2002. Unfortunately, we can’t rest on our laurels.
Every year the OISC publishes a list of the 100 most dangerous invasive species threatening Oregon. Two thirds of the organisms listed are plant diseases, insect pests, or noxious weeds—Plant Division business. In other words, most of the responsibility for invasive species exclusion in Oregon is shouldered by our agency and carried out by this division. This year we completed survey and detection programs for 23 of these organisms and carried out eradication projects for nine species that were discovered. A truly impressive accomplishment, but what about the rest?
In recent years we’ve been very successful at piggybacking new surveys onto existing programs. If a survey technician is going to be hanging a gypsy moth trap in an area, it doesn’t take much more time to hang a second trap nearby for a different target pest. Unfortunately, there is a limit to how far we can carry this strategy; there are no effective traps for many of the invasive species on the 100 Most Dangerous list. We’re reduced to simply looking for signs and symptoms that may indicate the presence of undesirable organisms. This is a big state; if we were to spread the responsibility for detecting undesirable invasive species evenly across our staff, each of us would have to cover over a million acres! How can we address this gap?
In my opinion, the answer lies in public outreach and education. We need to raise the overall awareness of invasive species issues, so people are less likely to bring them in, more likely to report them, and more supportive of exclusion, detection, and eradication programs. I’m still amazed that some environmentalists oppose our eradication projects. Yes, we frequently use pesticides, but if we’re successful, any environmental damage is short-term and reversible. On the other hand, if eradication fails, the invader becomes permanently established and the environment is degraded permanently and irreversibly. Though public awareness of the importance of biological pollution by invasive species has increased in recent years, it still lags far behind air pollution, water pollution, and other mainstream environmental issues. The “Silent Spring” of biological pollution hasn’t yet been written.
The OISC has taken some steps to document public awareness. A poll they commissioned in 2005 found that only 6 percent of Oregonians felt that the issue of invasive species was being dealt with to a great extent; 54 percent chose somewhat and 40 percent not much, not at all or don’t know. The OISC also hired a marketing firm to design a statewide awareness campaign plan. The estimated cost of the complete campaign was $200,000 to $500,000. Fundraising options are now being explored and the OISC is hoping to hire a staff person to pursue them. In the meantime, even with limited publicity, the statewide reporting hotline, 1-866-INVADER, now receives an average of 55 calls per month.
In a small way, I hope this annual report will help by opening the eyes of people it reaches. It is not “Starling Spring,” but I think you’ll agree that there is a lot going on in the Plant Division and that it is critically important to Oregon’s environmental health and the agricultural/horticultural industries that depend on it.
Finally, I’d like to point out that the Plant Division houses many other fine programs not directly related to invasive species. Programs involving native plant conservation, biological control, certification of crops for export, and others completed many impressive projects this year. I hope you’ll enjoy reading about the details in the pages that follow.
|
|
|
| Performance measures |
|
In our last five annual reports, we’ve tracked several performance measures. Once again it is time to review our progress.
A. Our first benchmark concerns the 10 worst weed and pest species that threaten to invade Oregon. These species are present in neighboring states or similar ecoregions and would have extremely serious negative impacts if they were to become established in Oregon (see the 2000 Annual Report for background information). Our goal is to keep them out as long as possible. Here is a progress report for 2005: 1. Gypsy moth—Treatments applied in Eagle Creek appear to have been successful, although another year of negative trapping will be required before we can declare the population officially eradicated. Only nine gypsy moths were trapped statewide. No eradication projects are projected for 2006. Future introductions are expected. 2. Japanese beetle—Four beetles were trapped near PDX this year. Treatments were applied to host material in the area. Future introductions are expected and public opposition to insecticide-intensive eradication programs is likely to grow. 3. Asian longhorned beetle—Survey results were negative. 4. Imported fire ant—No survey in 2005, but still not known to occur in the state.
5. Kudzu—Three infestations were found in 2000 and 2001. All were treated. Control at the sites has been nearly complete with only one small patch requiring retreatment in 2005.
6. Distaff thistle—Several dozen sites in Douglas and Jackson counties are being treated. The trend toward fewer plants appearing at these sites each year continues. 7. Purple starthistle—A site in Clackamas County is being eradicated. The trend toward fewer plants appearing at this site each year continues. 8. Hydrilla—This serious aquatic weed is established in both Washington and California. It is not known to occur in Oregon, but surveys have been irregular and incomplete. No organized survey was carried out in 2005. 9. Ramorum blight (a.k.a. sudden oak death)—Survey results indicate the eradication program in Curry County has succeeded in reducing the rate of spread. Eighteen infested acres were detected this year, down from 40 in 2001. Infestations at 15 nurseries and six landscape sites were eradicated. 10. Unknown—We must never forget that many exotic species could be harmful to the agricultural and native habitats of Oregon. Concentrating only on the known threats would leave us vulnerable to invasions by species currently not on our radar screen. Several general surveys, including that for exotic woodborers, improve our chances of finding unexpected invaders. 2005 Grade: “A-”
Previous years: 2004: “A-”
2003: “A-”
2002: “A-” 2001: “A-”
B. Percentage of total exported nursery stock rejected at destination. Tracking this rate over time will measure the effectiveness of our nursery inspection and certification programs.Formula: value exported nursery stock rejected / (gross nursery sales x percent exported) x 100 = percent rejected.For 2004: $60,673 / ($904,000,000 x 0.73) x 100 = 0.01%. Grade: “A” C. Percentage of approved exported seed lots rejected at destination. Oregon exports the majority of the seed produced in the state. Comparing the number of exported lots rejected at destination to the total number of lots approved for export, measures the effectiveness of our laboratory testing and certification program. Formula: number of exported seed lots rejected / number of seed lots tested and approved for export x 100 = percent rejected.
For 2005: 3/3,804 x 100 = 0.08% Grade: “A” D. Percentage of biological control potential realized . For each available biological control agent, a county infested with its target weed is a potential habitat. We can measure the success of our biological control program by calculating the percentage of these potential habitats where biological control agents have become well established. The better we do at introducing and redistributing biological control agents, the higher this percentage will be. Over time, our program activities should cause the percentage to rise unless the number of new target weeds and agents grows more quickly than our success at establishment and redistribution. If that happens, the percentage will fall indicating our program is falling behind.Formula: number of counties with each agent/weed combination well established / total number of counties with potential habitat x 100 = percentage biological control potential realized.For 2005: 439 /1,261 x 100 = 35% Grade: “A” E. Number of plant species listed as threatened or endangered in Oregon . This performance measure demonstrates the effectiveness of conservation programs relating to native plant species by identifying those that need protection and those that have recovered sufficiently to be removed from the list of threatened or endangered species. A declining number of threatened and endangered species indicates an effective program provided the species are recovering and not going extinct. The elimination of all non-grant funding in 2001 severely limited the effectiveness of this program. Replacement funding from lottery proceeds was approved by the legislature in 2005 and the program has expanded this year. For 2005: 58 species listed as threatened or endangered Grade: “B”
|
|
|
| Conclusion |
|
Overall, we’re doing well. There is room for improvement, but in the current climate of shrinking budgets and increasing risk of invasive species introduction, just maintaining our “A’s and B’s” report card is going to be a challenge. Thankfully, we have a smart, creative, and dedicated staff. I’m confident we’ll rise to the challenge.
|
|
|
| Plant division staff |
|
Plant Division staff
Dan Hilburn, administrator
Office Support
Shannon Brubaker, office manager
Program Assistants
Steve Finch, IPPM & Plant Health
Sue Nash, Nursery/Christmas Tree
Jo Davis, Noxious Weed Control
Insect Pest Prevention & Management
Kathleen Johnson, supervisor
Entomologists 4
Barry Bai
Jim LaBonte
Alan Mudge
Helmuth Rogg
Entomologists 2
Diana Kimberling
Kerri Schwarz
Terri Stafford
Josh Vlach
Richard Worth
Entomologists 1
Todd Adams
Bill Giacomazzi
Bennett Huffman
Curatorial support technician
Steve Valley
Plant Health
Nancy Osterbauer, supervisor
Plant pathologists
Shawn Meng
Sid Sedegui
Plant Health certification specialist
Cindy Fraley
Plant Disease program specialist 2
Melissa Austin
Robin Ludy
Aaron Trippe
Plant Disease program specialist 1
Erika Berghauer
Rebecca Tippner-Hedges
Native Plant Conservation
Bob Meinke, supervisor
Conservation biologists
Kelly Amsberry
Rebecca Currin
Troy Maddux
Nursery & Christmas Tree Program
Gary McAninch, supervisor
Lead horticulturist
Jan Hedberg
Horticulturists
Christy Brown
Beverly Clark
Debbie Driesner
John Ekberg
Gary Garth
Dan Hawks
Sherree Lewis
Dennis Magnello
Karl Puls
Lisa Rehms
Eric Reusche
Scott Rose
Susan Schouten
Assistant horticulturist
Melissa Boschee
Noxious Weed Control Program
Tim Butler, Supervisor
Biological control entomologist
Eric Coombs
Projects coordinator
Tom Forney
Integrated weed management specialists
Bob Barrett
Ken French
Dave Langland
Glenn Miller
Bonnie Rasmussen
Dan Sharratt
Weed management technician
Beth Myers
|
|
| |
|
|
