 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
The Asian Long-horned Beetle, Another Introduced Threat to Our Hardwood Trees Background: During the summer of 1996 the New York City, Park and Recreation Department was notified that several trees in the Brooklyn section had been vandalized. Upon investigation city workers discovered that the damage had been done not by vandals, but by a large beetle. Samples of the beetle were sent to Cornell University and tentatively identified as Anoplophora glabripennis or the Asian Long-horned Beetle. Following this initial report the USDA discovered an additional infestation on Long Island (Amityville). This second infestation is believed to have become established by tree workers unknowingly transporting infested wood from the New York City site. Currently about 1,200 trees in New York City and Amityville have been infested. Given the size of the infestation, it is believed that the insect was introduced some time in the late eighties or early nineties, possibly being introduced on wooden crating material arriving from China. Host: Elm, Willow, Poplar, Norway, Silver, Sugar and Sycamore Maples and Horse chestnuts have been reported as susceptible hosts. Life Cycle: There is one generation per year, although some individuals require a second year for completion of their life cycle. The adults are active from June through early October. Winter is spent in the larval gallery. In the late spring pupation takes place in the gallery and usually lasts two to three weeks. The adults emerge by constructing a circular hole between three eighths and one half inch in diameter. The adult female chews an ovipositional pit into the cambial layer and deposits a single egg at the bottom of the pit. During the life time a female can lay between twenty five and thirty eggs. The eggs hatch in one to two weeks. Thefirst and second larval instars feed in the cambial region, the third through fifth instar feed in the wood. The larvae produce large quantities of sawdust that are pushed from the galleries. Description: The adult is an attractive beetle measuring one to one and a quarter inches in body length. They are shiny coal black with as many as twenty irregular white spots on the wings. The antennae that may be longer than the insects body is banded black and white. Damage: Adults can cause twig mortality from their feeding. The most severe damage is caused by the larval feeding galleries. In high populations or if the attack continues for several years, branch or tree mortality can occur. The more heavily mined branches and stems can break off, especially during high winds. Control: No known chemical control exists. The current plan is to eradicate the new pest because of its limited distribution and its potential to do great economic harm. Presently surveys have been completed in the Brooklyn and Amityville areas of New York. Greater than 1,200 trees have been identified as infested. These trees have or are in the process of being removed. This is no small task since many trees are in courtyards with access only through buildings. It is expected that surveys will continue for four years after the last infested tree is removed. The federal, state and city governments have joined forces to replace these trees by jointly appropriating more than 2.5 million dollars. IMPORTANT: IF YOU FIND AN INSECT OR DAMAGE that resembles what is described in this article please contact one of the following agencies. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management, Charles M. Burnham; (617) 727-3180 x675. Massachusetts Department of Food and Agriculture, Phyllis Michalewich; (617) 727-3020 x124.n
Joint Efforts by Pesticide Bureau and Attorney General's Office Result in Court Decision Suffolk Superior Court ordered two Pennsylvania companies to pay $62,500 in penalties, for violating the State's Pesticide Laws. Attorney General Scott Harshbarger and his Environmental Protection Division, filed a complaint against Weeds Inc. and Buckeye Pipe Line Company, Limited Partnership L.P. The defendants applied unregistered materials along Buckeye Pipe Line's Ludlow Right-of-Way in the years 1991 to 1995. Before using the materials Buckeye Pipe Line L.P. and Weeds Inc. also did not file with the State's required regulations concerning Rights-of-Way (333 CMR 11.00). These materials were used in and around sensitive environmental areas such as protected wetlands. Buckeye Pipeline L.P. hired Weeds Inc. to maintain their Right-of-Way in Ludlow, Massachusetts. The case was referred to Harshbarger's office by the Enforcement section of the Department of Food and Agriculture’s (DFA) Pesticide Bureau. DFA Commissioner Jay Healy responded, "These regulations exist to protect people and the environment, and if someone ignores these regulations we will pursue them!" Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger stated, "It is critical that dangerous pesticides be used responsibly here in Massachusetts and that commercial pesticide applicators obey our laws or face serious consequences." Under the terms of the settlement filed along with the complaint, Buckeye Pipeline L.P. and Weeds Inc. will submit to the Rights-of-Way regulations and penalties. Assistant Attorney General Andrew Goldberg and Special Assistant Attorney General Richard Hecht of the Attorney General's Environmental Protection Division, and Supervisory Investigator Dennis Guastalli for the Department of Food and Agriculture, handled the case for the State. In summary, the rights-of-way regulations are the most comprehensive in the Country. If any pesticide applicator is requested to maintain any Right-of-Way (ROW) in Massachusetts with herbicides etc., and is not positive that a company and/or applicant possesses the needed approvals by the State, they (the applicator) must contact the Bureau and request assurance and/or approval before any application of materials along that ROW. Under the Rights of Way regulations limitations apply to the use of materials, under specific conditions, locations, etc. to wetlands, water sources, wells, and inhabited areas. These sensitive areas are protected under the ROW regulations (333 CMR 11.00). Please contact Dennis Guastalli at (617) 727-3020 x135 for more information. n Vapor Drift and Clomazone Herbicide The movement of pesticides from the treatment site is generally caused by soil erosion from rain, irrigation, or highwinds. One method of movement, not commonly considered, is due to volatilization of pesticides following application and subsequent deposition off-site. In the past, there have been many examples of off-target movement of pesticide vapors that affected areas outside the application site. There have been documented examples of certain phenoxy herbicides (e.g. 2,4-D) affecting areas two to three miles down wind of the application site. These examples generally occurred because of the use of certain forms of these herbicides and local weather conditions. These high volatility herbicide formulations are no longer used, but that does not mean that the problem no longer occurs. Recently the Bureau received several complaints of damage occurring on ornamental shrubs and trees. The affected vegetation was either yellowed or exhibited what appeared to be "bleached out" as though it had lost its color. An investigation of the complaints revealed that there had been previous use of a herbicide sold under the trade name of CommandŽ in abutting properties. CommandŽ is the common trade name for products containing the active ingredient clomazone registered by the FMC Corporation. CommandŽ is a selective soil applied herbicide for pre-emergent weed control in various crops including: soybeans, peppers, pumpkins, and peas for the control of many broad-leaved and grassy weeds. Clomazone has certain physical and chemical properties, such as relatively high vapor pressure, which makes it susceptible to off-target volatility. The most important factors affecting clomazone volatilization from soil are mode of application, air temperature, soil moisture, wind velocity, and soil type. Pre-plant application, hot air temperatures, very moist soils, windy conditions, and low organic matter content soils exhibit the highest degree of volatility. The label warns applicators about the potential "drift" problems and requires and/or suggests the use other drift reducing products or application procedures, to reduce potential off-target movement. These recommendations and restrictions need to be followed precisely and additional care should be taken when applying any products containing clomazone. Vapor Drift and Clomazone There are numerous other pesticide active ingredients that also have the potential for off-target "drift", but due to clomazone’s obvious effects on vegetation its results are more noticeable. Consequently, additional care should be taken when applying clomazone and remember not to apply if local weather or field conditions are not appropriate for its use. If it is hot or relatively windy and the soil is wet and has low organic matter the chances are good that you could have drift problems. n FYI Briefs Massachusetts IPM Council...Promoting Integrated Pest Management in Every Community In the Bay State, aggressive promotion of integrated pest management (IPM) in non-agricultural settings began in the Spring of 1996 with the development of the Massachusetts IPM Council. This Council consists of representatives from state and federal government agencies including the Massachusetts Department of Food and Agriculture, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the Massachusetts Mosquito Control Association, academia through the UMass Extension, non-profit/public interest groups including MASSPIRG and The Waste Watch Center, and representatives from the New England Pest Control Association, Golf Course Superintendents Association of New England, Massachusetts Association of Lawncare Professionals, and the New England Sports Turf Managers Association. With just over a year behind them, Council members have agreed on a mission statement, and have formed workgroup committees that will begin IPM projects. The purpose of these workgroups is to better define IPM practice within the various non-agricultural environments, and to promote IPM in general through technical support and greater public outreach activities. The first of many workgroup projects is expected to come on-line in the Summer and Fall of 1997. Projects include a Structural IPM Checklist and a Structural IPM Standards fact sheet so that pesticide professionals working on indoor pest control can inform their clients about their good management practices. Additional projects include an IPM certification process by and for turf and golf course pest control operators and, lastly, an informational brochure on Council efforts geared to the general public. Through this voluntary and consensus-driven alliance, the Council intends to make a significant contribution to the state’s IPM infrastructure by including non-traditional, non-agricultural environments into Massachusetts’ IPM landscape!n Zone IIs : Ground Water Protection Bulletin The Pesticide Bureau’s 1997 listing of Massachusetts towns containing Zone II areas has changed significantly from last year’s list. Towns with wellhead protection areas (Zone IIs) for wells pumping 100,000 gallons per day or over, have jumped to 238 as compared to last year’s 198 municipalities. Also, new wells may have come on line for many of the previously listed towns resulting in even greater changes. DON’T GO BY LAST YEAR’S LIST : Check the updated Pesticide Bureau Information Bulletin - March 1997 - Groundwater Protection Regulations - 333 CMR 12:00. All certified/licensed pesticide applicators in Massachusetts were mailed this Information Bulletin. If you did not receive this mailing, call the Pesticide Bureau for a copy at : (617) 727-3020, x129, or x126. To resolve whether or not your application site is covered under these Regulations follow these steps : FYI Briefs GW Protection Bulletin
1998 Applicator License Renewal Reminder Licensed/certified applicators: Renewal applications for 1998 will, be mailed out again during the first week of October. Please STOP for a brief moment and jot down "1998 renewal applications" on your calendar or agenda for the first week of October. When the first week of October arrives, this calendar note will alert you to look for their renewal in the mail. All renewal applications are due by December 1, 1997. Immediate completion of the renewal application will ensure a rapid turnaround so that you receive your 1998 license quickly. Promptly make sure that your renewal application is complete with your signature, correct fee, and other items such as confirmation of insurance depending on your license type. The number one reason the Bureau sends back renewal applications is that the individuals forgot to sign them! Please call Sandra Payne at (617) 727-3020 x145, to follow-up on your renewal application status. Follow-up is especially important if you give the renewal to someone else such as your secretary or insurance agent to complete. If you have moved, changed your mailing address or name, please mail or fax these changes to the Pesticide Bureau. Our fax number is (617) 727-7235. It is essential that the Bureau have your current name and address before mailing out license/certification renewals.
Location Change for Exam Dates Due to circumstances beyond the control of the Pesticide Bureau, the pesticide exams scheduled for July 22 and August 21, 1997 at the Ashland 4-H Center, 466 Chestnut St., Ashland, MA have been canceled at this particular location. The exams for these dates will be administered at the University of Massachusetts Eastern Ext. Center, located at 240 Beaver St., Waltham, MA. n Report Unlicensed Pesticide Applicators The Bureau would appreciate efforts by dealers and licensed applicators to inform their customers, that the commercial use of pesticides without a license violates Massachusetts laws and regulations. Unlicensed applicators lacking sufficient training, pose a risk to people and the environment. "Drop a dime" on unlicensed applicators by calling John Kenney at (617) 727-3020 x134. Don’t be undercut by those who are not licensed, not insured, and not properly trained! Any landscaper using pesticides commercially, without a license or certification, violates the Massachusetts Pesticide Control Act (M.G.L. chapter 132B) and accompanying regulations (333 CMR). Every year the Pesticide Bureau investigates numerous complaints that unlicensed individuals are using pesticides on a customer’s property. Individuals operating without a license risk enforcement actions up to, and including, civil and criminal court. In the past the Department has enforced the above regulations to the full extent of the law. Past enforcement actions taken by the Pesticide Bureau resulted in a penalty of $150,000 for a large national pest control company. Use of a pesticide means any act of handling a pesticide, releasing of a pesticide, or exposing of a person or the environment to a pesticide, including, but not limited to: a. Application of a pesticide including mixing or loading of equipment and any supervisory action in or near the area of application. b. Storage actions relative to pesticides and pesticide containers carried out or supervised by an applicator. c. Disposal actions relative to pesticides and pesticide containers carried out or supervised by an applicator. d. Transportation actions relative to pesticides and pesticide containers except those by carriers and dealers [333 CMR 10.02]. This means that landscapers using any pesticide in the course of their commercial operations must, at a minimum, be licensed. Any product that has an EPA Registration number (EPA REG) on the container is a pesticide. This includes insecticides, herbicides, weed and feed products, fungicides, etc.,. If you are using a weed killer to remove weeds in the driveway, you must be licensed. If you are using a fertilizer/pesticide mix, you must be licensed. This includes any such products commonly available to homeowners from local stores. For dealers who sell pesticides for turf, note that some of your customers who purchase general use pesticides are doing so for commercial purposes, rather than for personal use. While it is legal for the sale to be made, it would not be legal for the landscaper to commercially "use" them. The Pesticide Bureau would appreciate your efforts to inform these individuals that commercial use of pesticides without a license violates Massachusetts laws and regulations. n
Unusable Pesticide Collection Program Update The Department has continued working on a program to collect unusable pesticides for disposal. The goal of the program is to gather all unusable, unregistered or waste pesticides at collection sites for disposal by a hazardous waste hauler. Get Yourself Connected to the Information Superhighway! Whether your goals are to expand your company’s marketing tools, conduct research, communicate with colleagues, or plan your next vacation, the Internet is an amazing tool. Today, many personal computers (PCs) are sold with the features needed to get you connected to the Internet very quickly. A company referred to as an Internet access provider can quickly set up your own Internet access account. Many access providers charge monthly fees and offer unlimited Internet access time. Online services such as America On Line and Compuserve also offer Internet access. Pesticide applicators and others can readily find information on pests, pesticides, integrated pest management (IPM), and regulatory information from a wide range of sources. EXTOXNET - provides readable non-biased information from four university extension offices on pesticide toxicity and environmental fate. Learn about IPM at , the National IPM Network-Northeast Region web site. Most universities and governmental agencies post a wide array of informational resources on their web sites. Check out UMass Extension and the U.S. EPA The following is a sample of the many web sites that can assist pesticide applicators and those interested in issues related to pests, pesticides, and agriculture. n
Integrated Pest Management
|
|
|
 |