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 

ENTS,

To find addresses and emails for various forest service and USDA people you
can go to this webpage from the USDA Office of Communication:
http://www.fs.fed.us/contactus/employee_search.shtml

For Forest Services Offices there is this directory:
http://www.fs.fed.us/fs/directories/fs_offices_mailrooms.html

Keith Lannom klannom@fs,fed.us

To find the addresses and emails for National Park Service People and
places, you can go to this site:
http://home.nps.gov/applications/directory/

I hope these addresses are useful to some of you.

Ed Frank