Scientists: Save the moth

Entomologists say eradication is impossible, unnecessary

By WES SANDER

Capital Press

A state plan for eradicating the light-brown apple moth is misguided and lacks scientific backing, a panel of scientists and observers said on Tuesday, Aug. 25, at a hearing of the Senate agriculture committee.

On July 31, CDFA released for public comment a draft environmental impact report on a plan for eradicating the moth from California. The plan lays out techniques including aerial and ground spraying of insecticides and pheromones, twist ties and syrupy substances applied to trees and poles and a wasp that eats the moth's eggs.

While some agricultural interests expressed support for the program, other witnesses at the hearing questioned its necessity.

The moth is known to exist over 23,000 square miles in 15 counties in California. Witnesses dismissed the notion that eradication of a moth over such a widespread area is possible.

"There is no way that you can eradicate simultaneously in all these areas," said James Carey, professor of entomology at the University of California-Davis. "This is a huge undertaking. You wind up with this endless cycle of population reduction in one area, then you go to the next and you have a resurgence in the one you just left, and so forth."

CDFA acknowledges that the moth has yet to cause serious damage, instead citing its potential for damaging more than 250 commercial crops, including citrus, grapes and deciduous tree fruit.

Opponents of CDFA's plan criticize the agency's characterization of the moth as an invasive pest that warrants eradication, saying it has long existed in California without causing significant damage. Some contend that eradication is a reaction to trade regulations and is not justified by science.

"LBAM should be viewed less as an invasion in progress and more as an invasion that is completed," Carey said. "I consider it a fatal flaw in this EIR that it's based on the erroneous assumption that eradication is possible. It is difficult for me to overstate the difficulty of eradicating a pest that is as widespread and as entrenched as LBAM."

The hearing coincided with a series of public-input sessions conducted by CDFA around the state. No representatives of CDFA attended the hearing. Agriculture Secretary A.G. Kawamura was invited but did not attend.

"There is no need to eradicate the LBAM from the state of California as it's considered a minor pest of little concern or consequence," said Daniel Harder, executive director of the arboretum at the University of California-Santa Cruz.

Staff writer Wes Sander is based in Sacramento. E-mail: wsander@capitalpress.com.