[MPWG] Fwd:

[Roy Upton]

Hello All,

I am new to the invasive species conversation but have learned a 
tremendous amount about the subject having been involved in pesticide 
spraying programs  here in California against the Light brown apple 
moth (LBAM).

Managing invasive species appears to be a cash cow for State and 
Federal Regulatory agencies because at any time, they can deem the 
simple presence of an invasive as an emergency, with no scientific 
review, and implement broad ranging invasive management or 
eradication programs. This also allows the same agencies to seek 
funding through emergency channels  that would otherwise not be 
available to them.

There is no doubt there is a need to be aware and sometimes act on 
invasives. But, working with entomology and IPM experts in California 
have made it clear that a different paradigm of identifying and 
managing invasives is needed. Working with LBAM it was very clear 
that regulatory scientists painted the worst case theoretical 
scenario of the threat of LBAM, a superficial leaf roller that is 
almost identical to native species of totrixes (e.g. orange tortrix). 
Orange tortrix, like many other leafrollers (including LBAM) are 
seldom problems in healthy agriculture systems, are easily and 
cost-effectively managed in agriculture settings, and do not prevent 
international trade of the commodities from areas hre the "invasive" 
is endemic.

What we also learned is that regulatory agencies cherry pick their 
scientists to act on "expert advisory committees" and then those 
scientists cherry pick the scientific literature to justify their 
eradication programs. These programs almost always mean greater use 
of pesticides, greater burdens on farmers, and often pits communities 
against agriculture and agriculture against regulatory agencies, 
especially small farmers. The larger mono-crop agribusinesses are 
typically fine because they are team players with the regulators 
while oftentimes the small or organic farmer is out of the fold. It 
is a very unhealthy dynamics that is created largely around the 
management of invasives.

The regulators also hire "independent" scientists to publish papers 
that establish that use of pesticides is more effective and "less 
destructive" than manual removal of invasives.

Lastly, USDA is abut to start a marketing campaign and declared 
September "Invasive Species Awareness month" with the primary goal of 
getting the public to be more accepting of their pest eradication 
programs. A commercial that was created for LBAM showed a little girl 
running theugh woods that were disappearing before her eyes and 
eventually she disintegrated into nothing implying that LBAM was 
going to destroy the ecosystem and, as has been the mantra of the 
California Ag commissioner "Our way of life". They are using all of 
the same fear-based rhetoric that fueled support for the invasion of 
Iraq and keeps that machine going. It is sad, but they have become 
masters of manipulation in this regard.

The scientists we worked with, which include world renowned 
entomologists and IPM experts, emphasize the need for accurate 
biological assessments to be made to determine real-world scenarios 
of the impact of an insect before engaging in what are often futile 
eradication programs (CDFA has been eradicating the same 9 species of 
insects every year for 30 years). This can be done through climactic 
modeling to determine the potential distribution of the insect, an 
evaluation of its biology in terms of destructiveness, a comparison 
with native species, ability to manage in agriculture systems, impact 
on natives, etc. They also highlight that such a review must be 
multi-disciplinary so the invasive is reviewed from a multi-faceted 
perspective. Too often, the expert committees are made up of 
scientists with a particular focus on eradication, or a particular 
eradication tool, and lack the ability to look at the larger 
biological picture of whether or not an invasive is truly going to be 
destructive, beneficial to the ecosystem, or have not material effect.

As an FYI, the link below will give you an idea of the issues that 
were at hand with LBAM, which we have found is very similar to the 
issues associated with most invasives. It is a Senate hearing before 
the California Ag committee. If you go to about 4 minutes into the 
hearing the testimony provided by the panelists encapsulate the 
issues of management of invasives very clearly. The panel also 
includes a 40-year veteran with eradication programs with USDA who 
was in complete agreement with our assessment of the problems 
associated with current policies of managing invasives.

I hope you find this useful and informative. -Roy Upton

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P32UsXa3V94&feature=related






-- 
Roy Upton RH, DAyu
Executive Director, American Herbal Pharmacopoeia


Shipping address
3051 Brown's Lane
Soquel, CA 95073 US
TEL: 1-831-461-6317
FAX:  1-831-475-6219
website: www.herbal-ahp.org
e.mail: herbal at got.net