new society of american foresters western...

BY CATHY LUCERO

Clallam County,which is wedged intothe northwesternmost corner ofWashington State,encompasses someof the best tree-growing country inthe world! It has also been the battle-ground for some of the most con-tentious environmental conflicts overendangered species, in particular, thespotted owl, but also anadromous fishand many more. By the late nineties,much of our forest industry wasscrambling to adjust to lower harvestquotas, complex habitat plans, andstream setbacks. The term “sustain-able” harvest was said everywhere, butjust how that was to be determined orachieved was hotly debated.

This was the setting when, 20 yearsago, I became the first noxious weedcontrol coordinator for the recentlyactivated Clallam County weed board.I had a newly minted environmentalscience degree and a background inbotany. Most of the 100-plus weeds onthe list were weedy species that colo-nized open disturbed areas andcaused significant agricultural impactsand economic losses. Therefore, mostof our efforts focused on infestationsin and around agricultural lands.

However, a slow and nearly invisibleinvasion that begun decades agopicked up momentum. Scientists werenow sounding the alarm about pro-found ecosystem impacts caused by

rogue ornamentals, as well as seem-ingly helpful, but increasingly harmful,non-natives that had spread farbeyond their intended range. Asawareness of these effects on anincreasingly diverse range of habitatsgrew, so did Washington’s agro-centricweed list. In 1997, there were 106 inva-sive plants species on the noxiousweed list; fast forward to 2020 andthere are now over 160. Many areshade tolerant, and at least four non-native invasive trees have been added.There are 51 species sitting on a moni-tor list as we collect more informationand ponder whether these “monitor”species are aggressive and harmfulenough to warrant listing and poten-

tial regulatory action; five on this mon-itor list are trees.

How is it that so many plant speciesbecame problematic, and why will thenoxious weed list continue to grow? Weall know that even the best-intentionedactions can yield unpredictable results.For example, broadcasting non-nativespecies like everlasting pea-vine, as agood wildlife forage (not!) as well aserosion control, (too good!) has enabledthis resourceful pioneer species tobecome an overpowering competitor inyoung reprod units.

Even forests are vulnerable

For decades, usually only Scotch

Looking to the Past and Future WhenManaging Invasives

S O C I E T Y O F A M E R I C A N F O R E S T E R S

April/May/June 2020 Oregon • Washington State • Alaska Societies Volume 65 • Number 2

Western Forester

In This Issue: Invasives

(CONTINUED ON PAGE 2)

PHOTO COURTESY OF CATHY LUCERO

In Washington State, the Olympic Invasive Working Group surveys for andremoves knotweed, a Class B weed on the noxious weed list.

broom and some of the thistles wererecognized by the forest industry asproblematic for tree regeneration, butthese problems could be addressedwith routine site preparation. In thedense forests of my region, mostforesters viewed invasives as simplenuisances that would drop away assoon as the canopy closed.

It turns out forests aren’t as immuneas we thought. The impact and burdenof invasive species on forests has only

become more evident with time, butso has our recognition of the value ofhealthy forests in our community, interms of jobs, economy, and renew-able resource and sustainability. By2004, a serious threat to tree produc-tion and forested habitats emerged inthe form of an assemblage of woody,invasive Polygonum species, oftenlumped together and called Japaneseknotweed. Closer investigationrevealed not one, but several distinctalthough closely related species:Japanese, Giant, and the aptly named,Bohemian, a particularly aggressivehybrid of Japanese and Giantknotweed parents.

Much has been written aboutknotweeds, as if straight from a scriptfor a ’50s horror film of an experimentgone terribly wrong. These prize-win-ning ornamentals were introducedinto the United States in the late 1800s,but in Washington State were notedonly as far back as the ’30s in closeassociation with railroads and loggingactivity. The theory of origin inWashington is that very young shootswere cultivated by camp cooks for useas early spring greens. Nearly 90 yearslater, the camps are gone, but

knotweed is not. Instead knotweedspp. are running rampant along manyriver corridors, creating living wallsthat halt forest succession, alteringstream flow, disrupting complex foodwebs, and creating a biological desert.Long thought to only readily colonizeopen habitats, our experience inWashington has proved otherwise.Over the years, knotweed thickets haveformed massive monocultures span-ning hundreds of acres containing lit-tle to no other vegetation, includingtrees. Invasive knotweeds have provedto be remarkably persistent, and likemost noxious weed problems, requirea consistent, multi-faceted, long-termcommitment to combat successfully.

Building partnerships aroundinvasives

As the magnitude of threats posed toforests by knotweed and a host of othermore recent non-native invaders hasemerged, so has a coalition of unlikelypartners. As my job title suggests, I amalways looking to coordinate and bringthe people solution to bear on the inva-sive problem. To that end, in my littlecorner of the world, the OlympicPeninsula, we have formed a coopera-tive weed management area (CWMA),dubbed the Olympic KnotweedWorking Group. Fifteen years later, andmuch expanded, we’re now theOlympic Invasive Working Group. Landmanagers of both public and privateforests, environmental groups, NativeAmerican tribes, governmental agen-cies and regulators work collaborativelyto combat common adversaries thatknow no jurisdictional boundaries. Weshare information about what worksand what doesn’t, as well as new threatsposed by invasive plants and some-

2 WESTERN FORESTER ◆ APRIL/MAY/JUNE 2020

Next Issue: Workforce Development

Western ForesterSociety of American Foresters

PO Box 82836 • Portland, OR 97282 • 503-224-8046www.nwoffice.forestry.org/northwest-office/western-forester-archive

Editor: Andrea Watts, [email protected] Forester is published four times a year by the Oregon, Washington State,

and Alaska Societies’ SAF Northwest Office

State Society Chairs

Oregon: Jeff Grogan, CF, 541-912-8279,[email protected]

Washington State: Wes Tracy, 360-489-2556, [email protected]

Alaska: John Yarie, CF, 907-474-5650,[email protected]

Northwest SAF Board Members

District 1: Tom Hanson, Forestry andArboriculture Consultant, ArborInfo LLC,206-300-9711, [email protected];www.ArborInfo.com

District 2: Mark Buckbee, 541-580-2227,[email protected]

Anyone is at liberty to make fair use of the material in this publication. To reprint or make multiple reproduc-tions, permission must be obtained from the editor. Proper notice of copyright and credit to the WesternForester must appear on all copies made. Permission is granted to quote from the Western Forester if thecustomary acknowledgement accompanies the quote.

Other than general editing, the articles appearing in this publication have not been peer reviewed for techni-cal accuracy. The individual authors are primarily responsible for the content and opinions expressed herein.

Please send change of address to:Society of American Foresters, 10100 Laureate Way, Bethesda, MD 20814

[email protected]

Looking to the Pastand Future WhenManaging Invasives(CONTINUED FROM FRONT PAGE)

Tom [email protected]

206 300 9711www.arborinfo.com

Providing information about trees and forests

LORENZFORESTRYCHUCK LORENZ, CF 1770

Forest Management Planning &Operations, Inventory, Valuation

for over 40 years

[email protected]

360-951-0117

times animals. We pool our workforceswhen we can and inspire each other tobe alert and keep up the effort. Thisloose consortium is designed to sup-port and empower individual partnerswith crafting an effective response toinvasive weeds on lands they managewhile taking into account their organi-zational structure, resources, and spe-cific management goals.

For the forests in Clallam Countyand elsewhere in the Pacific Northwest,a significant vector for invasives is con-taminated road-building materials. Forthat reason, most federal, and manyWashington State agencies nowinclude weed-free material languageand standards in their contracts.Clallam County Weed Control Boardstaff, funded by the Olympic NationalForest and the Clallam County RoadDepartment, is authorized to inspectand certify rock sources. With the sup-port of these two entities, we offer freeinspections and a report with cus-tomized, practical, remedial actions tomeet agency standards. By workingtogether, we can ensure that projectsaren’t delayed, and forests of all kindsare protected in the long term.

In addition to actively controllingexisting infestations in forests, weedboards simultaneously pursue meas-ures to prevent the spread of invasives.The solution, like the problem, lieswith people. So when you hear, “I’mfrom the government and I’m here tohelp,” don’t laugh. Even though theweeds on our list may shift over time,the fundamental mission and overar-ching goal of weed boards inWashington State has not. We arecharged with aiding our communitiesby protecting and preserving the land,our natural resources and our environ-ment. Get interested, get involved. Talkto us. Let us know how we can help.Even if you don’t live in Washington,there is someone, some group that isfocused on dealing with invasivespecies. We’re here for you. ◆

Cathy Lucero is the Clallam CountyNoxious Weed Control coordinator. Shecan be reached at 360-417-2442 [email protected].

WESTERN FORESTER ◆ APRIL/MAY/JUNE 2020 3

This publication is a benefit of your membership in your SAF State Society

Editor’s NoteBY ANDREA WATTS

As the new editor of the Western Forester, it is serendipitous that my firstissue is on invasives. I found my way to forestry by volunteering with GreenSeattle Partnership work parties to remove invasive plants in Seattle’s parks. Ihadn’t known that the Himalayan and evergreen blackberry clumps growingaround Grays Harbor County were in fact invasives plant. Since they wereeverywhere, I assumed they were natives. Having seen the detrimental effectsof invasive plants, such as English ivy, English holly, and blackberry, uponnative plants in Seattle’s parks, I was determined to remove invasive plantsfrom the family property. My dad downplayed how widespread the Englishholly was in our forest, but the five-foot-high pile of English holly that myyounger sister and I piled on the burn pile changed his mind.

In this issue, there are several articles featuring management strategies tocontain the spread of invasive plants, such as choke cherry in Alaska and falsebrome on the Willamette National Forest. The “Invasives on the Horizon” articleis a compilation of future invasives we should be aware of. And to providemuch-needed positivity around this topic, there are several success stories.

Thank you to the authors who contributed to this issue. I would also beremiss not recognizing the advertisers who also make producing the WesternForester possible.

And lastly, congratulations to our student members who graduated thisyear!

PHOTO COURTESY OF ANDREA WATTS

A recent sweep of a section of the family forest yielded a truck full ofEnglish holly.

FOREST RESOURCES TECHNOLOGYSAF Accredited • http://cocc.edu/programs/forestry

Ron Boldenow, Ph.D., C.F., ForestryRebecca Franklin, Ph.D., DendrochronologyBret Michalski, M.S., Wildlife Science

E-mail: [email protected] (541) 383-7756

CENTRAL OREGON COMMUNITY COLLEGE Bend, Oregon

BY GINO GRAZIANO

he snow wasdeep, which

resulted in inappro-priate shoes beinglost in the snowdrifts,yet the Anchoragestudents were unde-terred as they poredover the trees’ branch tips for theirplace-based science project. The data,which was checked by myself andtrained teachers, proved that the stu-dents correctly identified the treespecies and the number of moosebites on their branch tips.Determining bite variability and theresulting tree architecture on differentspecies of trees was core to theresearch question the students wereanswering: How does the spread ofinvasive chokecherry trees (Prunuspadus and virginiana) in Anchorageforests impact how moose browsenative trees and shrubs?

Excessive bites (browsing) bymoose can lead to damaging changesto tree architecture that results in the

appearance of an upside-down broomand reduces fecundity and survival ofthe tree. By combining their browsedata with that from other schools, mygroup of students found the invasivechokecherry were not as impacted bymoose browse as native trees, and asthe density of a chokecherry infesta-tion increased, so did the rate of nativetrees that resembled upside-downbrooms.

Why worry about chokecherry?

In 2017, I gained an interest in thechokecherry invasion of Anchorageforests while at the Alaska InvasiveSpecies Workshop where I saw a posterfeaturing a youth-led study onchokecherry. The students comparedthe diversity of understory vegetationin areas with and without chokecherryand found that diversity decreasedwith the invasion of chokecherry.Later, anecdotal observations of fewerinsects on these trees lead to a formalstudy of impacts on salmon food webssince these insects can make up a sig-nificant portion of the diet of youngsalmon. University of Alaska Fairbanksgraduate student David Roon placed

small rafts under trees to catch insectsfalling into streams from native treesand invasive chokecherry on Chesterand Campbell creeks in Anchorage.Roon found fewer insects anddecreased diversity of the insectsfalling into streams from thechokecherry than the native treespecies.

There are no native prunus speciesin Alaska. The introduction ofchokecherry began in the 1950s ashorticulturalists searched for land-scape solutions in a challenging envi-ronment. The pretty flowers, coldhardy nature, and general resistance tomoose made Prunus padus (Europeanbird cherry or May Day tree) and P. vir-giniana (Canada red variety of com-mon chokecherry) excellent candi-dates. University Extension Servicehorticulturalists and other forestry,agriculture, and wildlife professionalspromoted planting the tree. Theattractive flowers and fruit that birdsdevoured increased the popularity ofthese trees. However, by the late 1990sand early 2000s, resource managersnoticed these trees were spreadinginto forests around Anchorage, andFairbanks. This led to resource man-agers and invasive plant specialistsbecoming concerned and seeing aneed to control the chokeberry’sspread.

When invasive plant managers andthe University Extension Service beganeducating nurseries, other retailers,and the public about the spread of thisspecies, they were initially met withresistance. Early on, invasive plantmanagers discussed chokecherry as aspecies to watch out for but hesitatedto call the popular tree invasive.Scientific evidence that chokecherrycould impact resources such assalmon continued to mount, andsome nurseries stopped selling thetree. Then in the winter of 2010 and2011, the Alaska Department of Fishand Game confirmed that three calfmoose had died after browsing onornamental chokecherry trees growingin a homeowner’s yard. The toxincyanide is present in branch tips, andit’s why these trees are resistant tomoose; it’s also the likely reason whythe Anchorage students found less evi-dence of browse on chokecherry.Having seen that cyanide can lead to


Alaska’s Chokecherry Trees:From Ornamental to Invasive

T

PHOTO COURTESY OF GINO GRAZIANO

Since their introduction to Alaska in the 1950s, chokecherry trees are nowcommon in backyards, urban parks, and native areas. They can grow eitheras a shrub or small tree, and produce fruits that are eaten by birds.

the death of moose, an iconic speciesof Alaska, the people in Anchoragetook notice of the extent thatchokecherry had invaded the sur-rounding forests and increased sup-port for management.

Developing a managementstrategy

Management of chokecherry inAnchorage and elsewhere in Alaskahas challenges. The trees, when cutdown, vigorously sprout from exposedtrunk and underground roots, whichmakes herbicide applications neces-sary for complete removal. Alaska resi-dents, however, are generally opposedto using herbicides on public lands.Invasive species managers initially tar-geted smaller trees using weedwrenches, a specially made device thatcan “wrench” small trees from theground. In Anchorage, the annualWeed Smackdown event draws in any-where from 50-100 volunteers towrench chokecherry trees out offorests and parks. Thick infestations,however, are often a network of shootsconnected to larger trees and make itimpossible to not leave some root frag-ments behind. Those root fragmentslead to quick regeneration, and thepublic realized that herbicides wereneeded to manage infestations.

Although the need for herbicides tomanage chokecherry infestations wasapparent, the community didn’t sup-port broadcast herbicides throughoutthe parks, and neither did the invasivespecies and land managers. Directtreatments were used, such as apply-ing herbicide on the cut surface of astump or squirting small amounts intoa cut in the cambium layer. Thesemethods are still used today but haveproven inefficient for larger infesta-tions. In these instances, invasivespecies managers are using injectionguns, and basal bark treatments thatapply specially formulated herbicidesto the bark on the base of a tree. TheUniversity’s Cooperative ExtensionService is presently studying basal barktreatments to understand efficacy,impacts to native vegetation, and her-bicide fate in the environment. Allthese combined efforts have signifi-cantly advanced removal ofchokecherry from Anchorage forests.

In Anchorage, efforts are focused on

removing large seed-bearing treesfrom yards and parks to slow thespread, while continuing efforts toaddress smaller trees before theymature. Dense infestations will requirecontinual monitoring to remove anyregeneration.

Other communities are also noticingtheir own infestations of chokecherry.Seeing what happened in Anchorage,these communities, beginning inHope, Alaska, have jumped onremoval. Residents are removing oldmother trees, and events are held towrench out or treat feral trees withherbicide. Other communities, such asTalkeetna, Homer, Soldotna, andJuneau are beginning these eradica-tion efforts too. These smaller commu-nities have an opportunity to eradicateinfestations before they are as difficultto manage as those in Anchorage. Inresponse to community efforts, theAlaska Division of Forestry with sup-port of the US Forest Service, State

and Private Forestry is piloting aremove and replace program in selectcommunities.

What we’ve also learned fromAnchorage is that we must be vigilantin surveying beyond community greenspaces since additional infestationsare found along rivers and trails. Wehave found chokecherry trees in theChugach State Park and ChugachMountains around Anchorage. There isalso a high potential that chokecherryis already moving up and down riversbecause of birds and bears. However,because the public and industry issupportive of eradicating chokeberryfrom Alaska’s forests, we are hopefulthat the spread will be controlled. ◆

Gino Graziano is an invasive plant spe-cialist with the University of AlaskaFairbanks, Cooperative ExtensionService. He can be reached at 503-504-5143 or [email protected].


PHOTO COURTESY OF GINO GRAZIANO

At the annual Weed Smackdown event, nearly 100 volunteers turn out toremove chokecherry trees from Anchorage’s forests and parks.

www.greencrow.com

Certifiably Proudof the Washington

Tree Farm Program

BY YOLANDA INGUANZO

imilar to humandiseases, plant

diseases throughouthistory have causedepidemics and pan-demics. New insectpest infestations canalso be devastating.These pests and diseases can be par-ticularly impactful when they spreadfrom their endemic area of origin to anew area where the host plants are notadapted to defend against these novelpests or diseases and where their nat-ural enemies do not exist. Exotic plantpest introductions have had seriousconsequences and have led to the for-mation of state and federal agricultureregulatory agencies.

At ports of entry, US Department ofHomeland Security Customs andBorder Protection officers inspect arti-cles such as cargo that have the poten-tial to spread plant pests to the US, butthey can only inspect a small percent-age of incoming articles, passengersand conveyances, and many plantpests are very cryptic. Signs and symp-

toms can be hard to detect. The nextline of defense is a robust surveillanceprogram to find pests that have beenintroduced into our states and commu-nities but may not yet be established.

In the 1980s, there were many new

introductions of significant plantpests, and it became clear that earlydetection can prevent pests from get-ting established—the earlier a pest isdetected, the better and less costly theoutcome. In 1982, the CooperativeAgriculture Pest Survey (CAPS) pro-gram was created. CAPS is comprisedof representatives from USDA PlantProtection and Quarantine (PPQ) andthe state departments of agriculture.

In 1999, officials of the USDA PPQand their state counterparts at theNational Plant Board formed theSafeguarding Review Study and draft-ed the Safeguarding Review Report,which contained a number of recom-mendations to address the increasingproblem of new plant pests. A criticalarea of need that was identified wasstrengthening the pest detection infra-structure and developing an effectivesystem for prioritizing and fundingpest detection activities.

A systematic survey program

The formation of CAPS establisheda uniform nationwide survey program,and it has continued to evolve as newpests are discovered and new survey


The Cooperative Agriculture Pest Survey:Collaborative Nationwide Monitoring

S

PHOTO COURTESY OF YOLANDA INGUANZO

One invasive pest are nematodes, which are microscopic organisms thatconsume a plant’s roots. Soil samples are collected and analyzed todetermine if the area is infested.

Seedling Nursery Since 1974

“Serving Many of the Reforestation Needs of the World From This Location Since 1889”

We bring experience with owners that care about their product and customers.

Approximately 10 million seedlings in annual production1 container site (plugs), 2 bareroot/transplant sites (p+1, 1+1)

Contract growing and spec seedlings for forestry and Christmas tree production

LET US GROW YOUR SEEDLINGSDavid Gerdes Mike Gerdes

[email protected]

FORESTERS • NURSERYMAN • SEEDSMAN

SILVASEED COMPANYP.O. Box 118 • Roy, WA 98580 • (253) 843-2246

methods are developed. Because sur-vey funding is always limited, theCAPS program identifies the peststhrough a prioritization process todetermine those that are most worthyof that limited funding. Each state alsohas a state CAPS committee thatdecides how best to use survey fundsand identify the most pressing pestrisks for their state. In some states thiscommittee can include universityextension and other agencies with astake in plant health.

States are given a proportionalshare of CAPS funding to conduct sur-veys for pests and incoming pest risksdeemed a priority by the state, as wellas to survey for pests that can impactthe nation. Because states are con-nected by geography but also by raillines, air travel and interstate high-ways, if a pest becomes established inone state, all other states are at risk.

USDA PPQ encourages states tomaximize survey efficiency by survey-ing for more than one pest at a timethat may be found in the same loca-tions for each survey project. InWashington State, the Department ofAgriculture (DOA) maximizes efficien-cy by surveying for several insect pestsat each survey location and hangs aset of traps with different lures at eachsurvey site while also visually survey-ing the host plants/trees for signs ofpest damage.

Most pest surveys are accomplishedthrough a cooperative agreementbetween the USDA and the state orlocal agency or organization that car-ries out the survey. CAPS cooperativeagreements facilitate collaborationbetween the state and the local USDAState Plant Health Director’s office andprovide accountability to ensure fundsare used as intended. Cooperativeagreements for CAPS surveys stipulatethat the resulting survey data will bereported in a national database.

Survey methods

One important function of theCAPS program is developing standard-ized survey methods. This results inthe most effective use of funds by notfunding unproven and ineffectivemethods. The use of standardizedeffective methods also allows negativedata to be recorded (the absence of apest), which may be useful in certify-

ing exports of plant products to for-eign countries that require absence ofparticular pests. Through the years, asnew pests have become known andnew methods have been developed,the pest lists and methods haveevolved to meet changing risks.

The CAPS Resource andCollaboration website http://caps.ceris.purdue.edu/ contains informa-tion for pest surveys and pest datasheets that are organized for easy refer-ence. The website is open to the publicand can be a useful reference for any-one working in pest monitoring ordetection, or anyone seeking informa-tion on exotic plant pests. Pestdatasheets are formatted uniformlywith taxonomic information, descrip-tions of life stages, biology and ecology,pictures showing signs of damage andinfestations, known hosts, known dis-tribution, survey methods, and identi-fication methods. There is also a list ofreferences for further researching.

In one of the longest running CAPSsurveys in Washington State, DOAreceives CAPS funding to survey formore than 30 wood boring insects,such as Asian long horned beetle andother plant pests that could severely

impact the state’s forest resources, aswell as affect other industries thatdepend on healthy forests, such as realestate and tourism. To supplementCAPS funding, states often use thePlant Protection Act (PPA) Section 7721.The CAPS program facilitates the pestdetection projects funded through PPASection 7721 by providing infrastruc-ture for the states to run survey pro-grams and providing the informationon survey methods, traps and lures,and a data repository. In WashingtonState, PPA Section 7721 is used to fundsurveys for Asian Gypsy moth andother exotic defoliating moths, as wellas a grape pest survey, stone fruit pestsurvey, defoliating moth survey, exoticsnails and slugs survey, and other proj-ects promoting plant health inWashington.

Engaging the public has been crucialto the success of keeping exotic plantpests out of the Pacific Northwest. Formore information about the CAPS pro-gram or to find out how you can getinvolved, visit the Hungry Pests website(bit.ly/2BtnudF). ◆

Yolanda Inguanzo is the Pest SurveySpecialist for Washington and Alaskawith the USDA-Animal Plant HealthInspection Service Plant Protection andQuarantine. She can be reached at 360-753-9430 or [email protected].


PHOTO COURTESY OF YOLANDA INGUANZO

The traps found attached to treesalongside roadways and in forestsare examples of ongoing surveysefforts by state agencies. In Alaska,this trap is for the Siberian silkmoth.

Restore ourfederal forests

to restore ourrural communities

Join us @HealthyForests.Org


BY JENNIFER LIPPERT ANDGLENN MILLER

he WillametteNational Forest

started trackingthe grass species,false brome(Brachypodiumsylvaticum) in the1990s when popula-tions started expo-nentially expandingin the forest under-story. This grass ofEurasian origin wasinitially introducedto Oregon as anaccidental escapeefrom agronomicresearch plots nearOregon State University in the early1900s. There is anecdotal evidencethat it was intentionally seeded on theWillamette National Forest as a com-ponent of a wildlife forage mix for skidroads in the 1970s.

False brome and its effects on theenvironment are dramatic, which iswhy managers are concerned about itsspread. It can severely reduce under-story plant and animal diversity inhabitats ranging from prairies in fullsun to shaded conifer forests to ripari-

an streamside habitats. It successfullycompetes for soil moisture with treeseedlings in plantations. Additionally,false brome thatch creates a perfectcover for voles that readily girdleyoung trees. Palatability for wildlife islow since it has a toxic substance thatbrowsers avoid. It may also alter fireregimes especially where it has adense growth of thatch.

The Willamette National Forest andOregon Department of Agriculture(ODA) have collaborated on weedinventory and control of false bromefor over 30 years. ODA and FS staffnoticed false brome was dispersingalong road corridors and spreadinginto recently harvested stands in sev-eral areas on the forest, especially theFall Creek corridor on Middle ForkDistrict and the Foley Ridge corridoron McKenzie River District. Treatmentof these stands is difficult and expen-sive, because it requires crews wearingbackpack sprayers to walk in parallelacross the unit to find all the plants.

In 2012, ODA staff member GlennMiller suggested that we switch fromour post-harvest method of treatment,which used funds generated from thetimber sale, to an aggressive pre-treat-ment of road shoulders. This approachwas aimed at reducing false bromealong travel corridors by treating areas

with false brome two years prior toharvest. This would prevent seed pro-duction, so there was a lower probabil-ity that false brome seed would betransported into the unit by equip-ment, people, or wildlife. Followingtreatment, we would seed skid roadsand landings with native grasses tofurther inhibit movement of weeds

A Proactive Approach to Manage False Brome

T

Jennifer Lippert

Glenn Miller

PHOTO COURTESY OF GLENN MILLER

False brome is a perennial grasswith lime-green leaves that turn towhite in the winter. Since it is shadeand drought tolerant, this invasiveplant can grow in a variety of land-scapes, especially forests. Falsebrome is currently foundprimarily in Oregon and is listed asa B rated weed by the OregonDepartment of Agriculture; smallinfestations have been found inCalifornia and Washington.

We provide practical solutions for wildlifeand other natural resource management.

Our goal is to provide you with the highestlevel of service and the most effective

solution to any natural resource concern.

[email protected] • 503-680-7939

WE SPECIALIZE IN:• Developing wildlife programs for

forest certification including SFI and American Tree Farm System

• Wildlife Surveys• GIS Services

onto disturbed areas. This method has shown great suc-

cess in keeping infestations confinedto road shoulders and out of recentlyharvested units. We are now usingStewardship and Good NeighborAuthority funding to conduct pre-treatment of road shoulders for all

high-priority invasive plant species. Itis much more economical because itgreatly reduces our need to treat post-harvest and allows the understory torecover much more rapidly so that itcan function as habitat for the nativeplant and animal species. ◆

Jennifer Lippert is a botanist for theWillamette National Forest. She can bereached at 541-225-6440 or [email protected]. Glenn Miller is theNW Oregon IWM Coordinator for theOregon Department of Agriculture. Hecan be reached at 541-954-8293 [email protected]



Although birds and small mammals move seeds, logging activities alsocontribute to the movement of false brome.


False brome can be treated with herbicides, but hand pulling is also aneffective way to remove the plant. Some volunteer work parties, such asthese REI volunteers, clear hiking trails of false brome.

Norm MichaelsForestry LLC

Forest management tomeet your goals

• Management Plans • Reforestation• Timber inventory • Timber cruising

Over 40 years managing forests inOregon and Washington

[email protected]

Land Management | Real Estate Services | Wildlife ManagementRecreational Leases | Technical and Data Services

Anyone can see the beauty.Our specialty is helping preserve your legacy.

Chehalis 360.740.3757 • Kirkland 425.820.3420

americanforestmanagement.com

ith the negative impacts thatinvasive species have upon the

landscapes in the Pacific Northwestand the threats that new invasivespose, it’s easy to forget there are suc-cess stories. Native species can reclaima landscape once invasive plants areremoved. Volunteers are willing tospend weekends clearing outknotweed or English ivy. Individualtrees have resistance to foreignpathogens. The surveying measures atour ports do prevent invasives fromentering the United States and thefield surveys identify early infestationsthat can be eradicated.

Here are two success stories.

Posed for a Comeback:Port-Orford-Cedar

BY RICHARD SNIEZKO

Port-Orford-cedar (Chamaecyparislawsoniana, Lawson’s cypress) is along-lived conifer native to northwest-ern California and southwesternOregon. It used to be widely planted inurban landscapes, particularly in NorthAmerica and Europe until the acciden-tal introduction nearly 100 years ago ofa non-native pathogen, Phytophthoralateralis. The pathogen causes Port-Orford-cedar root disease, which cankill large old-growth trees, as well asyoung seedlings. It led to a decline ofthe cedar in its native range and inNorth American urban forests. What

was once a multi-million-dollar prod-uct for the horticulture industry was nolonger profitable. More recently, thedisease has also appeared in Europe.

Genetic resistance is an organism’sprimary line of defense, but it was ini-tially unknown if Port-Orford-cedarhad any. Testing at Oregon StateUniversity (OSU) confirmed there wassome resistance. Because resistancebreeding is a vital tool to save ournative tree species affected by non-native pathogens and insects, in 1997,a large-scale inter-agency, inter-regional applied resistance programwas led by the US Forest Service(USFS) and Bureau of Land

Management (BLM). The program wasbased at the USFS’s Dorena GeneticResource Center (DGRC) in CottageGrove, Oregon; the Dorena GeneticResource Center is an internationallyrecognized world leader in developingresistant tree populations.

With the assistance of many USFSand BLM employees and other coop-erators, more than 14,000 parent treeshave been selected and tested forresistance at OSU. Two types of resist-ance have been characterized:(1) qualitative (controlled by a singlemajor gene) and (2) quantitative(putatively polygenic).

Unique, containerized seedorchards for each of the 13 breedingzones in the Pacific Northwest arebeing established. The goal is to pro-vide resistant seed for deploymentwhile retaining genetic diversity andadaptability. Results from the field tri-als are encouraging, but ongoing mon-itoring is needed to confirm the dura-bility and stability of the resistance.While most trees in natural stands arehighly susceptible, early data indicatesthat 50 percent or more of theseedlings produced from orchard seedare resistant, and breeding is under-way to increase resistance further.

Resistant orchard seed is now avail-able for several breeding zones and isbeing used in reforestation andrestoration. The discovery of resistancemay even provide an avenue to onceagain use this native tree species inurban plantings. Because of this suc-cess, the Port-Orford-cedar ResistanceProgram may be one of the fastestmoving and successful resistance pro-grams for forest trees in the world. ◆

Richard Sniezko, an SAF member, is ageneticist at the U.S. Forest ServiceDorena Genetic Resource Center inCottage Grove, Oregon. Sniezko can bereached at 541-767-5716 [email protected].

Interested in Port-Orford-cedar seed?Contact Don Kaczmarek, OregonDepartment of Forestry, [email protected].


Thwarting Invasives in the Pacific Northwest:Success Stories from the Field

W

PHOTO COURTESY OF RICHARD SNIEZKO

Pollinations of these Port-Orford-cedar orchard trees will be used toincrease resistance in the nextgeneration.

Oregon Forest PestDetector program

BY WYATT WILLIAMS

Since 2013, many Oregon’s naturalresource agencies, such as the OregonDepartment of Forestry (ODF) andOregon Department of Agriculture(ODA), and local governments haveteamed up on the Oregon Forest PestDetector (OFPD) program to protectthe state’s forests and agriculturefrom damaging invasive species. TheUSDA-funded program, coordinatedand led by Oregon State UniversityExtension Forestry, aims to trainarborists, landscapers, park workers,and other professionals on the earlysigns and symptoms of priority inva-sive forest insects.

Using a combination of online pre-sentations, face-to-face seminars andfield training courses, over 500 pro-fessionals have been trained as “FirstDetectors” of emerald ash borer,Asian long-horned beetles, and otherexotic forest insects, which have yetto be detected in Oregon but whosearrival is imminent. The OFPD usesthe online reporting system, OregonInvasives Online Hotline, which is aproduct of Oregon Invasive SpeciesCouncil and Portland State University.While in the field using any smartdevice. First Detectors can take a pic-ture, record a GPS point, and log areport of possible invasive species.The overall goal is to detect key forestinvaders early in their invasion wheneradication is still feasible.

In the summer of 2019, two gradu-ates of the OFPD independently sub-mitted reports to the state’s invasivespecies hotline of suspicious exoticinsect damage to native twinberryplants (Lonicera involucrata) in thePortland metro region. ODF ForestHealth staff, alongside partners withthe ODA, responded to the reportsand identified an exotic woodborer,Agrilus cyanescens, previouslyunknown to the Pacific Northwest.This Eurasian insect has been presentin the northeastern US since at least1921 and feeds on native honeysuck-les (Lonicera sp.). ODF is assistingODA and other partners in monitor-ing and outreach of this discovery.

The discovery and report of previ-ously undocumented exotic wood-borer is proof-of-concept for target-ing education of Oregon’s forest pro-fessionals through the Pest Detectorprogram and demonstrates the effec-tiveness of a statewide InvasiveSpecies Hotline. However, given theuncertainty in funding and outlookfor government programs, the OFPDis at a tenuous crossroads. Short-termfunding will expire in comingmonths. After that, the state’s forestsand agriculture will be more vulnera-

ble to new, establishing invasivespecies. ◆

Wyatt Williams is an invasive speciesspecialist with the Oregon Departmentof Forestry. Williams can be reached at503-945-7472 or [email protected]. For more information onthe Oregon Forest Pest Detectors andcurrent class schedule, visit the OFPDwebsite: http://pestdetector.forestry.oregonstate.edu/ or extension.oregon-state.edu/ofpd.


FAIRWEATHERBIOMETRICS, LLC

Consulting services inforest biometricsand applied statistics

Stephen E. Fairweather, PH.D., ACF

[email protected]

BY HEATHER HANSEN

t is not news tomost foresters

that the use of her-bicides in forestryhas come underattack by the publicin recent years. Yet,herbicide useremains the most effective way to con-trol invasive plants and protect newlyplanted trees from competition sothey are free to grow.

In Washington and Oregon, the levelof fear and community unrest over theaerial application of herbicides overtimberland has increased in recentyears. Media coverage of glyphosateand related lawsuits has increased theanxiety level considerably. For thosewho get their scientific knowledgefrom TV, which is most people, Round-up sounds like a very scary product.Many people believe any exposure to itis likely to cause cancer. They also donot understand how a helicopter couldpossibly control wherespray droplets landwhen they hit theearth. If you do notunderstand how itworks, it seems logicalthat what comes out ofthe nozzles couldspread widely andland almost anywhere.I have listened to citi-zens describe this fear.Many sincerely believethat an application,miles from their home,could affect them,

their pets, livestock, and garden. Inreality, a helicopter pilot has a greatdeal of control over where the herbi-cide lands. The application is guided byGPS and the herbicide is laid downwithin approved boundaries. Allowingthe herbicide to drift out of the intend-ed application site is a violation of thelaw.

Another factor contributing toincreased apprehension is that manymembers of the public no longer trustthe Environmental Protection Agency(EPA). They are unaware that there arecareer scientists who have worked onpesticide research through multipleadministrations. The pesticide regis-

tration process is set inlaw and has not beenchanged by the currentadministration. They do

not know that the EPA has one of themost comprehensive pesticide regis-tration systems in the world. Over 120tests are required to ensure productswill not harm people or the environ-ment. Every time a concern is raised,more testing can be required, andmore restrictions added to the label.

The public is also unaware that thedecision to use herbicides is not madelightly by landowners. Purchasing her-bicides is expensive. Applicators mustpass a test and be licensed by the state

department of agriculture. Aerial appli-cators are also licensed and regulatedby the Federal Aviation Administration.

The Washington ConservationVoters just released their 2020-2024political campaign, which includes agoal of phasing out the “use of themost dangerous pesticides in forestland management.” This goal is basedon emotion and myth, not science.Pesticides used in forestland manage-ment are almost all herbicides. Mostherbicides are non-toxic to humans,other mammals, fish, and insects. It isunclear what criteria they may use todetermine something is dangerous. Itis even less clear how they would pro-pose to control noxious weeds, whichcan destroy habitat, or how they wouldcreate an environment conducive totree growth. The fact is that withoutherbicides, it is very difficult toreestablish trees or control invasiveplant species.

Communicate, communicate,communicate

The second most important part ofa herbicide application is communi-cating with neighbors. The mostimportant part of the application willalways be to follow the label andensure there is no drift.

Meeting with neighbors takes time,but it’s time well spent. It can mini-mize complaints and develop friends.The more information people haveabout an application, the more likelythey are to remain calm. People wantto be listened to. They want to knowyou care about them and their con-cerns. Most people are reasonablewhen their questions are answered.Many timber companies contactneighbors prior to beginning a harvestoperation. When it comes time tospray, someone in the company prob-ably already knows which neighborsare likely to be concerned.

It is also important to reach out tocounty commissioners or councilmembers. They will hear from con-cerned citizens. It is important forthem to also know that you care aboutthe land you manage and are protect-ing habitat by controlling invasiveplants. Helping them understand state


Herbicides are Part of the Forest Manager’s Toolkit

I

FORESTR 4ESTMGR

HOPKINS FORESTRYForest Managers performing herbicideapplication, young stand management,

harvest management, contract compliance,inventories, and forestry/natural

resources education

Dick & Paula Hopkins360-492-5441

[email protected]

TRUCK PHOTO COURTESY OFGLENN MILLER

Herbicides are appliedvia several methods,such as helicopter,backpack sprayer, orby a pickup truck.

SPRAYER PHOTO COURTESY OFANDY PERLEBERG

and federal regulations for herbicideuse will also help. Establishing andmaintaining open lines of communi-cation will help keep herbicides as anavailable tool.

Concern about herbicide use hasalso increased with state legislators.Most legislators are unaware thatevery aspect of pesticide use is regulat-ed by either the state or federal gov-ernment. Reaching out early andexplaining what you do, why you do it,and how it is regulated will reducetheir level of concern.

In 2019, Washington Senate Bill5597 created a work group on aerialpesticide applications in forestlands.The work group developed recom-mendations for improving the bestmanagement practices for aerial appli-cation of pesticides on state and pri-vate forestlands. In 2020, Senate Bill6488 was introduced by the same sen-ator to implement the work groupreport. SB 6488 failed to pass, but thework group report remains in place.Much of the report focused on

Oregon 2020 Annual Meeting is Now VirtualThe Capitol Chapter of OSAF invites you to join us for the virtual Oregon

SAF Annual Meeting from October 7-8, 2020. These two days will feature edu-cational sessions, video tours, poster presentations, an awards ceremony, andsponsor interaction.

The annual meeting’s theme, Forestry: The Sustainable Solution, takescenter stage during the plenary session on Thursday morning. SAF PresidentDr. Tamara Cushing will share thought-provoking ideas about sustainableforestry. The general sessions will continue the discussions of how forestry isa sustainable solution now and into the future, and a panel will discuss thecurrent issues affecting the sector. Numerous speakers will speak on the latestresearch findings and current policy topics regarding sustainability, and thefinal session will highlight water research and actively managing forestedwatersheds. Time will be given to live question-and-answer sessions.

Even in a virtual setting, we are offering a technical tour that will bebrought to you via video and followed by a live panel of land managers, biolo-gists, and researchers.

An awards ceremony will honor our members and colleagues. We will alsofeature a poster session open to students and professionals to participate in.

The Oregon SAF Executive Committee will meet on Friday, October 9, viaZoom.

The registration fees, form, and agenda can be found at:https://tinyurl.com/OSAF2020.

The Capitol Chapter is based in Oregon’s capital city, which is a diverselandscape that stretches from the scenic Cascades foothills through the riversand valleys to the highly productive Coast Range.


REGISTER FOR VIRTUAL CONFERENCE!

2020 ANNUAL VIRTUAL MEETINGOREGON SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS

Forestry:The Sustainable Solution

October 7-8, 2020

Online Registration: https://tinyurl.com/OSAF2020

• Virtual field tours

• Awards Reception

• OSAF Member business meeting

• Student session

• Poster session

• Exhibitor presentations

• Plenary session

• General session

• Research updates

• Live Question and Answer sessions

ANNU

ALM

EETI

NGH

IGH

LIG

HTS

(CONTINUED ON PAGE 23)

https://tinyurl.com/OSAF2020

e could devote another issue ofthe Western Forester to cover the

latest research on invasives in thePacific Northwest. Instead here’s asnapshot to get you up to date.

White Pines andWhite Pine BlisterRust Resistance

BY RICHARD SNIEZKO

There are nine white pine speciesnative to the United States: the westernwhite, sugar, whitebark, limber, foxtail,southwestern white, Rocky Mountainbristlecone, Great Basin bristlecone,and eastern white pine. Eight of theseare found in the western United States;eastern white pine is the lone whitepine native to the eastern UnitedStates. All nine are highly susceptible towhite pine blister rust, which is causedby the non-native, invasive fungalpathogen Cronartium ribicola.

Whitebark pine has been proposedfor listing under the EndangeredSpecies Act, partially due to its highsusceptibility to white pine blister rust.In some areas, this rust has killed morethan 95 percent of the trees. The con-sensus of scientists and foresters isthat development of genetic resistanceto this rust is needed to successfullymaintain or restore these species inthe most affected areas.

Researchers demonstrated thatresistance existed at a low frequency inwestern white pine and eastern whitepine in the 1950s. Soon after, severalForest Service regions started appliedprograms to develop resistance. In thePacific Northwest, the USDA ForestService’s Dorena Genetic ResourceCenter (DGRC) breeding programs ini-tially focused on two species of eco-nomic importance, western white pineand sugar pine. Resistance breeding ofthose species continues to this day.Since 2002, the center began evaluat-ing the other six western species ofwhite pines for resistance.

It’s important to know that resist-ance is not immunity; most seedlots

(even those with resistance) willinclude some susceptible seedlings.For long-lived tree species like thewhite pines, resistance also needs tobe durable against changes in thepathogen, stable across different envi-ronments, and occur frequentlyenough in an orchard seedlot to be ofuse to land managers.

Genetic resistance to white pineblister rust is determined by inocula-tion of seedling progeny with rustspores and evaluating their susceptibil-ity vs. resistance over a five-year peri-od. The goal is to discern the varioustypes of resistance that are present.

Since the program began, progenyof more than 4,500 western white pineparent trees from natural stands havebeen evaluated for resistance, and themost resistant parent trees or theirprogeny were put into seed orchards.In the last two decades, these newselections have become reproductivelymature, and breeding has increasedthe level of resistance further.

Some of the families from thebreeding program showed 50 to 80 per-cent more resistance relative to thesusceptible control subjects, and selec-tions from those resistant families willbe placed into future seed orchards.

Currently there are western whitepine seed orchards on USFS, Bureau ofLand Management, Confederated

Tribes of Warm Springs, QuinaultIndian Nation, Washington Departmentof Natural Resources, and privately heldlands, with a number of these now pro-ducing resistant seed. Based onseedling screening, the BLM’s Horningorchard currently has the highest levelof resistance documented for anorchard lot.

Since 1996, a network of field trialshas been established in Oregon,Washington, California, and BritishColumbia and will serve to monitorthe level and durability of resistance,as well as growth and adaptability ofwestern white pine in response to achanging climate.

Work on whitebark pine beganmore recently. In the beginning,researchers believed whitebark pinemight prove the most susceptible ofthe white pine species. In fact, relative-ly high levels of resistance are beingfound to occur at a modest frequencyin this species.

Since 2002, progeny from morethan 1,500 whitebark pine parent treesfrom public and tribal lands in Oregonand Washington have been planted toevaluate resistance. Parent trees arerated A to F for resistance, ‘A’ being themost resistant and ‘F’ being highly sus-ceptible, and these ratings are sent toland managers so efforts can befocused on resistant individuals.


The Latest News on Invasives in the PacificNorthwest

W

PHOTO COURTESY OF RICHARD SNIEZKO

Crater Lake National Park is the site of a whitebark pine field trial that isaccessible by the public.


Additional cone collections from thehighly rated trees are made, and theseed is used for restoration and graft-ing of the most resistant parent, estab-lish seed orchards, and for geneticconservation.

Field trials have been established byUSFS, National Park Service, andWashington Department of NationalResources, and these will provideinformation on field resistance andadaptation under a changing climate.One such planting, at Crater LakeNational Park’s Rim Village, is readilyaccessible by the public and presentsan opportunity for conservation edu-cation on invasive species and white-bark pine, genetic resistance, and for-est health.

Beyond the Forest Service, effortsare now underway to find funds forsequencing the whitebark pinegenome and using genomic resourcesfor restoration guidance.

With the finding of resistance, suc-cessful restoration of this threatenedspecies is now within reach for thewestern white pine, sugar pine andwhitebark pine, and this work is fur-ther paving the way for potentialrecovery of other white pine species.

Richard Sniezko, an SAF member, is ageneticist at the U.S. Forest ServiceDorena Genetic Resource Center inCottage Grove, Oregon. Sniezko can bereached at 541-767-5716 [email protected].

What We Know AboutSudden Oak Death

BY BLAKEY LOCKMAN ANDSARAH NAVARRO

Sudden Oak Death (SOD) is causedby the invasive pathogen Phytophthoraramorum. Mortality of infected oaksand tanoaks was first noted inCalifornia forests in the mid-1990s, butnot diagnosed in Oregon until 2001.The susceptible host list is extensive,including many horticulturally impor-tant species, but the most susceptibleforest tree in Oregon by SOD is tanoak.

Tanoak (Notholithocarpus densi-florus) is an evergreen hardwood thatranges from southwestern Oregon intothe coastal ranges of California and east

to the lower slopes ofMount Shasta. It is alsointermittently distrib-uted along the westslope of the SierraNevada Mountains as faras Mariposa County. It ishighly valued by NativeAmerican communities,mainly for its acorns,and has formed thebasis of their Californiaacorn economy forthousands of years;acorns are still a highlyvalued food item amongtribes throughout therange of tanoak. Tanoaksalso provide nesting,roosting, and foraging value for a varietyof wildlife species and have been foundto support a high diversity of ectomyc-orrhizae.

SOD infection begins in aerial partsof hosts where it produces spores thatspread by rain splash and through airdispersal. New introductions occurthrough human-assisted movement ofinfected plant material, such as rhodo-dendrons and azaleas. The pathogenhas been recovered in streams and soilfrom areas of infestation, but the roleof these inoculum sources in the forestsetting is not fully known.

There are four known lineages of thepathogen, three of which are found inNorth America: NA1, NA2 and EU1.The NA1 lineage is primarily in forestsettings, while all three lineages havebeen detected in nurseries. EU1 wasisolated from a forest setting for thefirst time in 2015 in southwesternOregon and appears to be moreaggressive than NA1 in a forest setting.

Management of SOD in the forestvaries by state, due to the status of thedisease and the varied presence of sus-ceptible hosts. The Oregon SOD pro-gram has focused on eradication and“slow the spread.” With the discovery ofEU1 and its known aggressive behavioron conifers in Europe, local eradicationof this lineage was initially attempted.Since 2019, Oregon’s SOD Programposition is to contain the spread ofEU1, while also continuing to slow thespread of NA1. Treatments to reducethe spread involve killing (chemically),dropping and burning host materialsurrounding infected trees within a

radius of 300-600 feet. In California,SOD was well established before theidentity of the causal agent was deter-mined. Management in Californiaincorporates a variety of techniques,including host removal, thinning tofavor non-host trees, altering environ-mental conditions in the stand, fuelsmitigation, and restoration activities torestore ecosystem function and/or pre-vent undesirable changes.

Getting a handle on SuddenOak Death in Oregon

In July 2001, SOD was discovered incoastal southwest Oregon forests. Insubsequent years, an interagency teameradicated and slowed the spread ofdisease through a program of earlydetection, survey and monitoring, anddestruction of infected and nearbyhost plants. Eradication treatments,totaling approximately 7,340, eliminat-ed disease from most infested sites, butthe disease continued to spread slowly,mostly in a northward direction.Recent developments of the SODProgram include the formation of theOregon SOD Task Force, an updatedeconomic impact assessment, and anew citizen science program.

In 2017, a SOD Task Force, com-prised of local, state and federal gov-ernment agencies, tribes, industry, andlocal residents, and environmentalgroups, was charged with developing acollaborative-based strategic actionplan. This plan would include secure-ment of additional resources to containthe NA1 lineage of P. ramorum and

(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)

PHOTO COURTESY OF BLAKEY LOCKMAN

Tanoak that are infected with Phytophthoraramorum have bleeding cankers on their trunks andbranches, and leaves become a pale green andeventually turn brown.

eradicate the EU1 lineage in CurryCounty, Oregon, using the best avail-able science.

Economic impact

Following adoption of the strategicaction plan, Oregon Department ofForestry (ODF) commissioned an eco-nomic impact assessment of SOD.Among the assessment’s findings werethat the disease has not had a signifi-cant impact on the economy of CurryCounty, and there has been no declinein timber harvest, export or log prices,or on recreation or tourism revenue.However, it appears certain privateproperties where tanoaks have diedmay have lost real estate value.

The assessment reported that cur-rent efforts are keeping the infestation’sspread to between half a mile and 4.5miles a year. With continued treatment,SOD’s spread north of the Rogue Rivercould be delayed until about 2028.Without any treatment, the diseasewould most likely arrive north of theRogue just four years from now andenter Coos County by 2028. Otherimpacts from discontinuing treatmentthat could happen as early as 2028include:

• sanctions on southwest Oregontimber exports by China, Japan, and/orKorea;

• loss of 1,200 jobs related to timberexport; $57.9 million in annual wages;

• reduction of timber harvest by15 percent, with proportional loss offorest products harvest tax revenue,and forest sector jobs and wages;

• collapse of rural residential prop-erty value; loss of real estate transac-tion revenues; and

• decline in recreation and tourismincome out of proportion to the extentof SOD infestation if an unfavorablepublic perception of the region takeshold.

What the assessment did not cap-ture were the potential impacts thatelude economic quantification, partic-ularly tribal cultural values and theexistence merits of tanoak-dominatedforests. Cultural practices with greathistoric and traditional meaning—acorn gathering, materials for basketweaving, hunting—are already com-promised by SOD. In addition, SODmay be an existential threat to tanoakand associated obligate species, and

these forests have an inherent exis-tence value and may contributeecosystem-level or biodiversity valuesunrecognized prior to extirpation.

Mobilizing citizen science

In September 2018, ODF andOregon State University (OSU)Extension collaborated to develop aSOD citizen science pilot project andoutreach education program. It was awell-attended community workshop inPistol River followed by citizen sciencetrainings in Gold Beach. The citizen sci-entist volunteers learned standard sam-pling protocol to set monitoring baitstations, collect, record, and send sam-ples to the OSU Forest Pathology lab fordisease screening every two weeks for athree-month period. Citizen scientistsdeployed 20 bucket baits on five sites atthe leading edge of the disease andbaited four stream reaches in the firstyear of the project. The second year ofthe project is currently underway.

Workshop success was measuredwith pre- and post- workshop evalua-tions. Before the workshop 34 percentof participants indicated they under-stood disease concepts “very much”increasing to 72 percent after the work-shop. First-year citizen science projectresults indicate that citizen scientistvolunteers are motivated to help withearly detection strategies by followingsampling protocols and spreadingawareness in the community. Theseefforts will greatly aid in identifyingsites for eradication before the diseasebecomes established.

Blakey Lockman is the regional plantpathologist with the USFS PacificNorthwest Region in Portland, Oregon;she can be reached (503) 808-2997 [email protected]. SarahNavarro is the regional SOD pathologistfor the USFS Pacific Northwest Regionin Portland, Oregon. She can be reachedat [email protected].

Balsam Woolly AdelgidNow in Alaska

BY ELIZABETH E. GRAHAM ANDJASON E. MOAN

Balsam woolly adelgids (BWA)(Adelges picae) are small sap-sucking

insects that feed on true fir trees (Abies)and can kill a tree within a few years.This insect was introduced fromEurope to the northeastern UnitedStates around 1900, the West Coast inthe late 1920s, and the southeasternUnited States in the mid-1950s. By the1970s it was established along theCascade and Coast Ranges of Oregon,Washington, and British Columbia.Alaska, however, long remained with-out any known instances of BWA. Thatall changed in June 2019 when BWAwas confirmed causing notable dam-age on dozens of ornamental sub-alpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) trees inDimond Park in Juneau, Alaska. This isthe first known detection of BWA inAlaska.

Alaska is home to only two nativespecies of fir—subalpine fir and Pacificsilver fir (Abies amabilis)— both ofwhich have limited ranges in the stateand neither of which occur naturally inthe Juneau area. Genetic analysis con-ducted by Dr. Nathan Havill, a USDAForest Service Research Entomologistspecializing in adelgids, revealed theBWA population in Juneau is genetical-ly identical to those in Oregon andWashington. However, because of thediscontinuous host availability withinsoutheast Alaska, it is unlikely theintroduction in Juneau was due torange expansion. Infested nurserystock is the presumed source of theintroduction, and all the BWA-impact-ed trees found to date are ornamentalplantings. The majority of BWA affect-ed subalpine firs in Juneau were plant-ed during two distinct timeframes:around 2007 and in 2012. The treescame from nurseries based in Oregonand Washington and were classified as“wild-harvest” seedlings, collectedthrough a permit from NationalForests. BWA is notoriously difficult toidentify at low levels and likely came inon these wild-harvested trees, takingmany years to build into noticeablepopulation levels. BWA was also con-firmed on a small number of addition-al ornamental fir trees. It is not knownat this time if these trees are associatedwith the wild-harvested fir plantings.

With the find of BWA in Juneau, aBalsam Woolly Adelgid Working Groupwas developed with staff from USDAForest Service Forest Health Protection,the Alaska Division of Forestry,


University of Alaska FairbanksCooperative Extension Service, and theAlaska Division of Agriculture. Thegoal of the working group is develop-ing a cooperative strategy for BWA sur-vey, control, and outreach.

In late 2019, members of the work-ing group met in Juneau to conduct aBWA delimiting survey. Since true firsdon’t occur naturally in Juneau, thegoal of the delimiting survey was two-fold: survey for symptomatic fir treesand assess the density and location ofornamental firs in Juneau. In surveyingthe entirety of the road system in theJuneau area, 76 true firs were docu-mented, of which 49 were sympto-matic and confirmed to have BWA; it ispossible other fir trees may exist inJuneau or that other known firs areinfested. A majority of the knownsymptomatic trees have already beenremoved (41 total) and efforts to reachadditional landowners with fir trees areunderway. The Alaska Division ofForestry is developing a cost-share pro-gram to assist landowners with BWAmitigation; funding for this programwas provided by the USDA ForestService. In addition to these efforts, aBWA fact sheet was developed and aninitial public workshop was held inJanuary 2020.

Southeast Alaska is comprised ofmany small communities scatteredaround the mainland and numerouswooded islands. It is unknown at pres-ent if BWA may exist in other commu-nities or within the natural stands of firin Southeast Alaska. Surveys and out-reach efforts will continue across theregion as we attempt to determine howwide ranging this pest may be in thestate and prevent further spread ofBWA from known infestations.

Elizabeth Graham, PhD is a forestentomologist with the US Forest ServiceForest Health Protection in Juneau,Alaska. Graham can be reached at907-586-8883 or [email protected]. Jason Moan is the foresthealth program manager for theAlaska Division of Forestry. Moancan be reached at 907-269-8460 [email protected].

Balsam Woolly Adelgid’sExpansion into theIntermountain West

BY LAURA LOWREY, DANIELLEMALESKY, AND IRAL RAGENOVICH

BWA was well established in theCascades by the late 1960s, and morerecently, it is expanding eastwardthrough the true fir forests of Idaho,Montana, and Utah. Aerial survey dataestimated nearly 200,000 acres withdead subalpine fir (SAF) across south-ern Idaho and Nevada in 2019.

In the drier extent of the SAF range,SAF is the only species that grows andrepresents in some cases >80 percentof overstory species composition. SAFis an important component of theEngelmann spruce/subalpine fir type.In addition, in many places throughoutthe Intermountain West, the sprucecomponent has been removed or killedby spruce beetle. The ability of BWA toinfest all size classes and affect coneand seed reproduction exacerbates theongoing challenge to the ecologicalsustainability of SAF.

Climatic models predict warmerwinters and drier summers acrosssouthern Idaho, Wyoming, Utah andNevada. Warmer winters allow BWA tosurvive and reproduce in historicallycolder high elevation forests. Driersummers exacerbate the physiologicalwater stress caused by BWA feeding.Engelmann spruce/subalpine fir forestsare the greatest water yielding areasacross southern Idaho and Utah.Impacts to wildlife, aquatic and fish-eries habitats, and municipal water-sheds could occur as riparian areas areaffected. BWA is changing fuel loadingand fire behavior within SAF-dominantlandscapes. True fir species are knownfor their capacity to retain dead greenand dry needles over long periods oftime, which will likely influence fireseverity and behavior. Economic valuesof this forest type are also threatened;recreational tourism in southern Idahoand Utah mountain ranges attracts mil-lions of visitors each year and totalsseveral billion dollars for the ski andoutdoor recreation industries.

A Utah BWA partnership was devel-oped in September 2017 to collaborateon BWA education and management.

The group includes USFS, APHIS(Animal Plant Health InspectionService), Utah State University exten-sion, Utah Department of Agricultureand Food (UDAF), Utah Department ofForestry, Fire and State Lands, and localski areas and resorts. The goals of thepartnership are developing a commoncommunication message; creating edu-cation materials; and developing a list ofcurrent needs to share with research(phenology, monitoring, data collection,and management recommendations).While the full ecological impacts of BWAremain to be seen in the IntermountainWest, these collaborative efforts willundoubtedly continue to offer outreachand mitigation guidance. EradicatingBWA from western ecosystems is notpossible. Understanding theinsect/ecology can inform science-based mitigation. Researchers arestudying the relationship of BWA dam-age and drought on SAF forest decline.BWA damage trend data across Idahoconfirms more damage found withinmore mild portions of the SAF range.The Rocky Mountain Research Station isstudying the relationship of BWA phe-nology and damages in northern Utah.Other research will describe the fuelsand potential fire behavior acrosssouthern Idaho, Montana, and Utah; animage-based management guide willdescribe potential fire behavior associ-ated with BWA-caused fuel loads. Thiswill augment recent findings that BWAinfestations at low, moderate, and heavylevels cause foliar moisture loss similarto dead trees. Finally, stand-markingguidelines that focus on keeping themost resistant trees on the landscapeand remote sensing tools that mayenhance detection success are beingdeveloped. ◆

Laura Lowrey is an entomologist withthe SW Oregon Service Center, ForestHealth Protection in Medford, Oregon;she can be reached at 208-373-4226 [email protected]. DanielleMalesky is an entomologist with theNorthern Region in Coeur d’Alene,Idaho; she can be reached at 801-476-9720 or [email protected] Ragenovich is a regional entomolo-gist with the Pacific Northwest Regionin Portland, Oregon; she can be reachedat 503-808-2915 or [email protected].



John Bell1949-2019

Dr. John F. Bell passed away onNovember 16, 2019, at the age of 95.8; apassing grade almost anywhere. Deathwas due simply to his advanced age. Hehad been a professional forester for 68years. His membership in SAF began in1949 and continued through his lifetime.In SAF, he was active for many years in anumber of responsible positions. He wasa Fellow, a Certified Forester, and amongthe many awards he received was aLifetime Achievement Award from OregonSAF.

His wonderfully supportive familyincluded numerous grandchildren, fourchildren and his surviving wife Myrna.

They were married for 69 years. John was an infantry officer in 1945-6,

serving in the 10th Mountain Division, thefamous ski troops of WWII. He completedhis BS at OSU in 1949, and his first profes-sional forestry job was cruising timber. Heworked for the Oregon State ForestryDepartment for ten years and was a pio-neer in the introduction of Variable PlotSampling.

His academic contributions to the fieldbegan with his first publication,“Application of the Variable Plot Methodof Sampling Forest Stands,” which hewrote with Lucien Alexander in 1959. Hisassociation with Alexander also led to thelong-running OSU Variability ShortCourse, now in its 6th decade at OSU. Hecontinued to teach Variable-Plot and 3P

Cruising workshops annually at OregonState, even after retirement, and gave out-side courses on four continents. In total,there were almost 100 of these courses,and they still continue at OSU.

Ronald C. Thompson1942-2020

Ronald C. “Ron” Thompson, 77, a long-time resident of the Forest Grove commu-nity, died, February 12, 2020, at his home.

He was born November 1, 1942, inArdmore, Oklahoma, the son of the lateJack David Thompson and Lucy (Hall)Thompson. Ron was a Veteran of theVietnam era, having joined the UnitedStates Army on March 30, 1966, inShreveport, Louisiana, Ron served for oneyear and nine months, until receiving hishonorable discharge on November 16,1967, at the rank of SP5.

Ron was united in marriage to DonnaRae Curtis on April 2, 1983, in the CentralBaptist Church in Forest Grove, Oregon.They celebrated their 36th weddinganniversary this past April. Following theirmarriage, they made their home in theForest Grove community.

He had worked as a policy and pro-gram analyst for the United StatesForestry Service for 30 years until retiringin the mid-90s. Following his retirement,Ron served as the City Planner for thecities of Yachats and Waldport, Oregon foreight years.

The family suggests that remem-brances may be contributions to the fol-lowing organizations: The GideonsInternational, PO Box 140800, Nashville,TN 37214 and The Crossing Fellowship,1950 Mountain View Lane, Forest Grove,Oregon 97116, in his memory.

William C. “Bill” Wagner1926-2020

William (Bill) Wagner passed awaypeacefully on April 10, 2020, in Portland,Oregon. He was born November 8, 1926,in Green Bay, Wisconsin to Joseph A.Wagner and Elizabeth (Hanna) Wagnerwhere he grew up with three brothers.

In 1954, he married Jean A. Plotecher,and they raised a family of four childrenin Eugene, Oregon. They spent 58 won-derful years together until Jean passedaway in 2012. They were active membersof St. Jude’s Catholic Church since itsestablishment in 1969.

He was a member of SAF from 1952-2020, and an active member of EugeneSouthtowne Rotary Club well into hisretirement years.

Bill was loved by many—he was always

We lost a number of long-time SAF members over the past six months. Due to spacelimitations, we not only had to abridge their obituaries, but we couldn’t fit everyone inthis issue. In the fall issue, we will include those members who passed recently.

We Remember


ready to have a good time, share a laugh,and had many, many stories to share. Hewas an avid proponent of education, andhis positive encouragement of his chil-dren and grandchildren, along with hiscan-do attitude, will forever be remem-bered and cherished by those who knewand loved him.

If you wish to commemorate Bill,please consider a contribution to a charityof your choice: Meals on Wheels, LaneCounty—www.mowlaneor.org; orProvidence Hospice, Attention:Bereavement William Wagner, 6410 NEHalsey Street, Suite 300, Portland, OR97213.

A Memorial Mass and Celebration ofLife will be held at a later date.

Robert “Bob” Nelson Witter1932-2020

Bob passed away peacefully in thecomfort of his own home with his familyon Browns Point, Tacoma, Washington, onMarch 17th, 2020, at the age of 87, after along battle with Multiple Myeloma. He ispreceded in death by his parents andinfant daughter Karen Monette. He is sur-vived by his wife and “first mate” of 65years, Janet, daughter Krista (Ulrik), sonMichael (Lizzie), and grandchildrenAaron, Sally, and Hana, sisters KatherineGaustad of Harstine Island, Washington,and JoAnne (Ken) Utne of Sunnyvale,California.

Bob joined the US Air Force in 1955,where he trained as a F86 fighter pilot.Later that same year, he married Janet—the love of his life, and they started theirshared journey together on Air Forcebases from Georgia to Texas—before hewas discharged as a Captain. In 1958 theymoved back to Seattle, so Bob could pur-sue his forestry career. His first job was asa forester/pilot, cruising timber forNorthern Pacific Railroad. In 1970 hejoined Weyerhaeuser where he had a var-ied and illustrious career with sabbaticalsat the Forest Service in Washington, DC in1973 and the Advanced ManagementProgram at Harvard University in 1981.Bob retired in 1992 as a Vice President ofForest Management.

An avid sailor, fisherman, mountainclimber, clam digger, wood turner, beekeeper, and friend to many, Bob will bemissed.

A memorial to celebrate Bob’s life willbe held at a later date to ensure everyone’ssafety. If you would like to be notifieddirectly as to when this will take place,leave your memories and contact info atBob’s private tribute wall at www.gaffney-funeralhome.com. Memorial donations inmemory of Bob can be made to theMultiple Myeloma Research Foundationat www.themmrf.org

Elbridge “Gock” CarlGockerell1924-2020

Former Forks resident Elbridge “Gock”Carl Gockerell was born May 20, 1924, inDuvall, Washington. He left our world Feb.6, 2020. He is survived by his wife of 66years, Gloria Jean Gockerell and his sonsTimothy Ryan and Daniel Glenn, alongwith many grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Gock spent his last days inhis home in Sequim, where he raised hissons and twin grandsons.

He lived a long and full life. Therewasn’t a single person he wasn’t happy tomeet. He told stories of his past andbrought them to life.

He served in the US Coast Guard as aradioman second class and in the USNavy Reserve as an aviator. The US Navyawarded him his wings 67 years later. Hismilitary stint began in 1942 when heenlisted in the Coast Guard. He later wascalled into service in March 1943 toattend boot camp in Oakland, Calif. Hejoined the Navy the following year andtook his first flight in a Kingfisher onMarch 7, 1944. He retired from theWashington State Department of NaturalResources where he was the area boss forthe Olympic Peninsula.

His life was meaningful to everyone hemet, whether that had been many yearsago or just minutes prior. He placed pur-pose in every encounter. Gock is incredi-bly missed and this world is a little lessbright without him in it. ◆

CESCL: Erosion and SedimentControl Lead Training, July 29-30,Live remote attendance for OR and WA.Contact: NWETC.

Conflict Resolution Skills forEnvironmental Professionals,August 4, Live remote attendance.Contact: NWETC.

Oregon Small WoodlandsAssociation 2020 Annual Meeting,August 20-22, Springfield, OR. Contact:Oregon Small Woodlands Association,www.oswa.org.

Who Will Own the Forest: TheSeries 2020, Sept. 23 & 30, Oct. 14, 21& 28, Virtual meeting. Contact:www.wwotf.org.

Oregon SAF annual meeting,Oct. 7-8, Virtual meeting. Contact: JulieWoodward, [email protected],tinyurl.com/OSAF2020.

Hagenstein Lectures—EmergingVoices in Forestry, Oct. 25, WorldForestry Center, Portland, OR. Contact:www.worldforestry.org/the-hagenstein-lectures/.

2020 SAF National Convention,Oct. 29-Oct. 31, virtual conference. Contact:www.eforester.org/SAFConvention.

Calendar of Events

Contact Information

NWETC: Northwest EnvironmentalTraining Center, 1445 NW Mall St., Suite4, Issaquah, WA 98027, 425-270-3274,nwetc.org.

Send calendar items to the editor [email protected].

Connecting Forest Landowners withSeedlings, Services and Contractors

DISCOVER Our Interactive Websitewww.forestseedlingnetwork.com

BUY/SELL SEEDLINGS • FIND VENDOR SERVICES & CONTRACTORS • VALUABLE RESOURCES

REMINDERState election informationis due to Northwest Officeby August 17.Contact:Melinda [email protected]

lthough the names of currentinvasives are well known, what

are invasives that we should be awareof? We asked the experts what inva-sives worry them, and here’s what theyshared.

Hokkaido Gypsy Moth

BY KAREN RIPLEY

The triangular red, green or browntraps you see from June to September,fastened on roadside tree trunksacross the United States, are usuallygypsy moth detection traps. States out-side the currently infested area, espe-cially those with commercial ties toAsia, are continuously attentive to pos-sible introductions of gypsy moth,Lymantria dispar and use pheromone-baited traps to locate new populations.There are several subspecies of L. dis-par: a “European” variety that wasintroduced to Massachusetts in the1860s and which feeds on an extensivenumber of broadleaved trees andplants, and has spread widely acrossthe eastern United States and Canada;and “Asian” varieties that are regularlycarried in on ships and equipmentfrom China, Japan, South Korea, andRussia and which feeds on foliage ofconifer trees in addition to dozens ofother trees and plants and not current-ly established in North America.

The Asian varieties of gypsy moths(subspecies L. dispar asiatica and L.dispar japonica and closely relatedspecies L. albescens, L. mathura, L.

monacha, L. postalba and L. umbrosa)are considered an extreme threat to thewestern US because these caterpillarsfeed on conifer foliage and femaleflight behavior makes them able tospread quickly and potentially eludecontrol efforts. Fortunately, many ofthe Lymantria species respond to simi-lar sex attractant pheromones, so everygypsy moth caught in annual detectiontrapping programs (implemented bystate departments of agriculture orforestry) is submitted for genetic analy-sis to inform response actions.

In 2019, a gypsy moth capturednorth of Seattle, in Woodway,Snohomish County, Washington, wasdetermined to be Lymantria umbrosa,informally known as the “Hokkaido”gypsy moth. It was the first record ofthis species being caught in NorthAmerica. After environmental analysis,and under an emergency order of theGovernor, the Washington StateDepartment of Agriculture respondedin May 2020 by spraying 672 acresacross the moth capture site with threeaerial applications of the microbialinsecticide Bacillus thuringiensiskurstaki. The area will be monitoredwith a dense array of pheromone trapsfor at least three years to confirmwhether the treatment was effectiveand that Hokkaido gypsy moth, fornow, won’t be making North Americaits new home.

Contact: Karen Ripley [email protected]

Annual Grasses—Ventenata andMedusahead

BY SHAWNA BAUTISTA

Most invasive plants are notthought to be direct threats to forestecosystems, but recent research indi-cates that invasive annual grasses maybe more of a threat than commonlyrecognized. Two species, Ventenata(Ventenata dubia) and Medusahead(Taeniatherum caput-medusae), aregaining attention in the westernUnited States as significant threats toarid shrublands, as well as dry forestecosystems. Both species are native toMediterranean regions and are spread-ing rapidly, particularly in the north-west. Recent fires in Oregon havedemonstrated that areas adjacent toand within dry forests that are invadedby ventenata can carry fire to andthrough forested areas. Rapid post-firecolonization may impede reforestationand lead to the same kind of grass-firecycle we have seen with cheatgrass inthe Great Basin. Thinning and juniperremoval activities can also uninten-tionally spread invasion by thesespecies, increasing fire spread, inci-dence and frequency. Resulting inva-


Invasives on the Horizon

A

PHOTO COURTESY OF JOHN GHENT, BUGWOOD.ORG

Many species and subspecies ofgypsy moth are visually indistin-guishable, so regulatory agenciesuse genetic tools to identify thespecies, and enable inferencesabout behaviors to devise effectiveresponse strategies. This moth is afemale Asian gypsy moth (Lymantriadispar asiatica).

sion and potential fire spread arecounter-productive to the purpose ofour projects, so close attention to pre-venting introduction, pre-projecttreatments, and post-project treat-ments is warranted.

Contact: Shawna L. Bautista,[email protected]

Asian Giant Hornet aka:Murder Hornet

BY KAREN RIPLEY

The Asian giant hornet (AGH, Vespamandarinia; known in popular cultureas the “murder hornet”) is an extreme-ly large yellow-jacket-type insect thatwas first observed in British Columbiaand Washington in late 2019. Thisinvasive species is a highly evolvedpredator of honeybees. It can deci-mate a colony/hive, killing workersand stealing the larvae and pupaewithin a few hours. Like other hornets,AGH also have potent venom in theirsting, the ability to sting many times,and aggressive behavior when theyfeel threatened, especially when theirground nests or the beehives they areattacking are approached.

Based on reported sightings oflarge, conspicuous insects (AGH are 11⁄2to 2 inches long with orange heads),specimens collected, and evidence ofbee kills (destroyed hives; with hun-dreds of decapitated workers), theWashington State Department ofAgriculture (WSDA) developed a 2020response strategy intending to eradi-cate AGH. The focus area is northernWhatcom County. Since we don’t knowhow AGH reached North America,their warnings, fact sheets and strate-gies are being widely publicized.

WSDA’s tactics target the seasonallifecycle and behaviors of AGH, whichare like the familiar annual cycle ofother yellow jackets.

In early spring new queens emergefrom overwintering sites and areattracted to feed on tree sap. WSDAdesigned adhesive “sap traps” arounddeliberately wounded trees to catchqueens. As young AGH workers beginto forage in early summer, seeking car-bohydrate and protein, “bottle traps”baited with orange juice solutions and

observations by alert beekeepersshould provide clues to locate anddestroy nearby colonies. In late sum-mer, when groups of AGH workersseeking protein aggressively attackbeehives, rapid reports from beekeep-ers will be even more critical to inter-cepting workers in order to locate anddestroy all AGH colonies before thenext generation of queens emerges inthe fall.

Interacting with AGH is dangerous.Approaching and eradicating activecolonies requires trained employeesequipped with protective gear andpesticides.

The WSDA website https://agr.wa.gov/hornets is the best source ofimmediate, up-to-date AGH informa-tion.


Exotic Wood-boringInsects

BY JIM LaBONTE

Introduction of exotic wood-boringinsects is a global phenomenon. Manysuch species have become establishedin the Pacific Northwest and new exot-ic wood-borers are found here everyyear. Several have already causedmajor damage in the region, such aswalnut twig beetle, Pityophthorus jug-landis. There are many other damag-ing exotic wood-borers not yet knownfrom the Pacific Northwest, such asAsian longhorned beetle, Anoplophoraglabripennis, and emerald ash borer,Agrilus planipennis. These peststhreaten native and urban forests,ornamental and indigenous shrubs,orchards, and timber production.

The cause of this problem is nomystery—it is the global economy.While exotic wood-borers infestimported commodities, such as woodin the form of art objects and lumber,and woody nursery stock, probably thegreatest source of these pests is solid-wood-packing material. Once in NorthAmerica, exotic wood-borers are fur-ther spread by domestic products,such as firewood and nursery plants.

Although many exotic wood-borers,such as emerald ash borer and walnut


Appraisals & Consulting• Harvest Level Projections• Due Diligence• Timberland Sales• Loan Analysis & Monitoring• Wood Supply Studies• Software Support

GIS Mapping & Analyses• Mill, Public, & Large Landowner Locations• Custom Maps & GIS Data• Overlay process, View & Watershed Analysis• 3D Mapping

Cruising & Inventory• Foresters are Highly Trained with Current

Technology• Tract, Stand, & Log Volume, Stocking, &

Statistics Analysis• Reforestation• Database Development

Seminars & Training• Continuing Education Credit• ArcPad in 1 day• Professional Timber Cruising• SuperACE• Individual or Group Training Available

Beaverton, Oregon

www.atterbury.com • 503-646-5393ATTERBURY CONSULTANTS, INC.

“Professional State-of-the-Art Forestry“

Software & Products• Timber Cruising–SuperACE & Pocket SuperEASY• ESRI & MapSmart• Forestry Tools, Rangefinders, BAF Devices, Data Collectors & GPS Units

(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)

PHOTO COURTESY OF WASHINGTON STATEDEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Asian giant hornets are extremelylarge yellow-jacket-type insectsthat are capable of decimatinghoneybee colonies and hives.

twig beetle, attack only a few hosts,some species, such as the Asian long-horned beetle, attack many broad-leaved trees. Still other species, likesome ambrosia beetles, can attackhundreds of both broad-leaved andconiferous hosts. While stressed hostssuffering from drought and disease areoften most vulnerable to insectattacks, pests like Asian longhornedbeetle, emerald ash borer, and walnuttwig beetle can attack healthy trees.

Effective response to these pests ischallenging. The best approach is toprevent introduction through stronginternational regulations, but enforce-ment resources are too few andimporters often flout regulations. Earlydetection, the second-best tactic, ishampered by this country’s limitedinsect identification resources anddetection technologies are inadequate.Funding for the constant surveysneeded is not sufficient. Eradicationand control are very difficult becauseof poor detection technologies andfew effective pesticides. Unless thereare dramatic improvements in regula-tions and enforcement, detection, anderadication and control options, exotic

wood-boring insects will continue toenter the Pacific Northwest and posemajor risks to our environment andeconomy.

Contact: Jim LaBonte [email protected]

Spotted Lantern Fly

BY KAREN RIPLEY

The spotted lantern fly (SLF,Lycorma delicatula) is a large plant-hopper insect that is native to easternAsia (China, India, and Vietnam). Mostlife stages have conspicuous white,black, and red coloration and piercingmouthparts used for sucking juice andsap from fruit and plant tissues. Adultsare about one inch long and have con-spicuous red hindwings.

SLF were first observed in the easternUnited States in 2014 and have becomesignificant pests in Pennsylvania, NewJersey, Delaware, Virginia, andMaryland. High numbers of SLF are arepulsive annoyance to homeowners.Feeding wounds reduce the qualityand shelf life of fruit and threatenassociated industries with quarantinesintended to prevent additional spread.Crops that are favored by SLF includeapples, grapes, hops, and cherries. Inforests, SLF can be found on mapleand birch trees. SLF lay eggs on hardsurfaces like rocks, trees, outdoorequipment and houses.

The most highly favored aggrega-

tion and egg laying site for SLF is the“Tree of Heaven” (ToH) Ailanthusaltissima, a large deciduous tree origi-nally from China that has been widelyplanted as an ornamental and streettree throughout the United States. ToHis also invasive and can be spreadshort distances by underground rootsuckers, medium distances by wingedseeds (like maple samaras), and longdistances when people move and cul-tivate it.

SLF is not known to be present onthe West Coast. It could easily be trans-ported here if adults or eggs hitchhikeon infested crops, equipment, fire-wood, or objects from the East Coastor Asia. In addition to inspecting cropsand goods that could harbor SLF, mon-itoring ToH will be a key part of earlydetection. Efforts are getting started toinventory ToH, encourage removal ofToH, and maintain/monitor a fewindividual male ToH in high risk areas.Such trees could serve as sentinels bybeing inspected regularly to facilitatepromptly detecting SLF when/if itarrives.

If you see a SLF, capture and report itthrough an Invasive Species Reportingsite such as https://www.oregoninva-sivespeciescouncil.org/report-an-invader. Improve your awareness ofToH identification (https://extension.psu.edu/tree-of-heaven) and localoccurrences; look for SLF nearby. ◆



PHOTO COURTESY OF RICHARD GARDNER, BUGWOOD.ORG

Spotted lantern fly is a significant pest in a number of East Coast statesand its preferred host tree is Tree of Heaven, a widely planted street andornamental tree original from China.

Asian longhorned beetle

PHOTOS COURTESY OF JIM LaBONTE

Walnut twig beetle

OSAF ExCom Approves ThinningPosition Statement Revision. OnMarch 23, 2020, the OSAF ExecutiveCommittee approved the revised“Thinning on Public Lands in Oregon”Position Statement. The core positionstates: We support the use of thinning as amanagement tool on public lands inforests of all ages because it can effectively:reduce tree stress, increase forest healthand vigor, reduce hazardous fuels, createunique forest structures that enhance bio-diversity and wildlife and fish habitat, andprovide useful products and public rev-enues. Research and management experi-ence do not support the use of inflexible,arbitrarily prescriptive restrictions on thin-ning, such as fixed age or diameter limits.With a strong foundation of ecosystem sci-ence and ongoing observations of treecompetition and other changing condi-tions, professional foresters and other spe-cialists can prescribe thinning strategiesthat best achieve diverse, long-term objec-tives. The Position Statement is availableat : www.oregon.forestry.org/oregon/poli-cy/general. Contact: OSAF PolicyCommittee Co-Chairs Mark [email protected] or Ed [email protected].

OSAF Policy Committee Soliciting

Assistance. The OSAF PolicyCommittee will update two PositionStatements in CY 2020: “ManagingMature and Old Growth Forests” and“Managing Riparian Forests”. If you areinterested in participating in either ofthese updates, contact OSAF PolicyCommittee Co-Chairs Mark [email protected] or Ed [email protected].

National Board of DirectorsApproves 3 Updated PositionStatements and Development of 2New Statements. On its April 27,2020 conference call, the nationalBoard of Directors approved revisionsof the following national PositionStatements “Regulation of GeneticallyModified Trees”, “Forest Management,Carbon and Climate Change” and“Parcelization, Fragmentation and theLoss of Private Forestland In The U.S.”These Position Statements are availableat: https://bit.ly/2NILX1c. The Boardalso approved the development of twonew Position Statements on:“Sustainability of American Forests”and “Recreation”. Contact: Dr. JohnBailey, a member of the NationalCommittee on Forest Policy at [email protected]. ◆


Policy ScoreboardEditor’s Note: To keep SAF members informed of state society policy activities, PolicyScoreboard is a regular feature in the Western Forester. The intent is to provide a briefexplanation of the policy activity. You are encouraged to follow up with the listed contactperson for detailed information.

improved communication withneighbors in a broad sense includ-ing clarifying existing buffers, com-municating best managementpractices and improving signage.

In addition to outreach efforts toallay the public’s concerns, landmanagers may wish to considerother application methods. In areaswhere citizen concern has beenespecially vocal, some companieshave increased the use of backpackspraying rather than aerial applica-tion. This can be a good strategy forsmall units near roads and homes.However, backpack spraying ismuch more expensive and lesseffective. There is also the potentialfor workers to be injured whenwalking on uneven terrain.

What does the future holdregarding the public’s acceptance ofherbicide use? Citizen concern isunlikely to diminish. The economiccrisis state budgets will face becauseof COVID-19 may result in lessaction related to pesticides as legis-lators struggle to keep schools openand social networks in place.However, the budget crisis will notstop the true believers who want tostop pesticide use. The best way tostop anti-pesticide proposals fromgaining traction is to speak to neigh-bors, elected officials, and commu-nity leaders now. Make sure theyunderstand how pesticides are regu-lated. Make sure they know yourgoal is to help trees grow and reducethe destruction that invasive plantscan cause if left unchecked. Morethan anything, make sure youraudience knows you are listening.As one of my favorite foresters says,“Once they know you, it’s harder forthem to hate you.” ◆

Heather Hansen is the executivedirector of the Washington Friendsof Farms & Forests in Olympia,Washington. She can be reached at360-705-2040 or [email protected].

Herbicides are Part ofthe Forest Manager’sToolkit(CONTINUED FROM PAGE 13)

SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERSWestern ForesterPO Box 82836Portland, Oregon 97282

PRINTED ONRECYCLED PAPER

Non-Profit Org.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDPORTLAND, ORPERMIT NO. 16

new society of american foresters western...

Documents