dead ash, Fairfax VA; FT Campbell
In the 25 years or more since it was introduced to North America, the emerald ash borer (EAB) has spread to portions of 27 states. and more widely across Quebec and Ontario. The U.S. quarantine area now covers 682,000 square miles. This has happened despite USDA APHIS spending more than $310 million (U.S.) and Canadian Food Inspection Service spending $25.7 million (Canadian).
The emerald ash borer has been a difficult insect to manage – it is cryptic, developing detection tools and management strategies required years of research and trial-and-error, it is easily transported to new areas in firewood. The beetle’s spread has been discouraging. However, now is not the time to give up! Large areas in which ash trees play significant roles in natural systems and planted areas are still outside the infested area. The tools and strategies can now be more effective in slowing further spread. Yet APHIS is now cutting funding for virtually all program components except biological control.
See the APHIS funding history below.
| USDA APHIS Funding History for Emerald Ash Borer, FY 2003-2015 | ||||
| ALLOCATION | ||||
| Fiscal Year | appropriation | Emergency funds from Commodity Credit Corporation | Carryover (funds not spent in previous years) | TOTAL |
| 2003 | 0 | $12,442,000 | $0 | $12,442,000 |
| 2004 | $1,208,000 | $39,879,000 | $0 | $41,087,000 |
| 2005 | $4,937,000 | $30,140,000 | $0 | $35,077,000 |
| 2006 | $10,000,000 | $15,000,000 | $0 | $25,000,000 |
| 2007 | $6,777,149 | $21,185,670 | $0 | $27,962,819 |
| 2008 | $22,863,672 | $8,884,802 | $0 | $31,748,474 |
| 2009 | $34,625,000 | $0 | $0 | $34,625,000 |
| 2010 | $37,205,000 | $0 | $0 | $37,205,000 |
| 2011 | 37,130,590 | $0 | $0 | $37,130,590 |
| 2012 | $9,727,000 | $0 | $15,000,000 | $24,727,000 |
| 2013 | $10,095,570 | $0 | $0 | $10,095,570 |
| 2014 | $8,999,000 | $0 | $0 | $8,999,000 |
| 2015 | $7,849,000 | $0 | $0 | $7,849,000 |
| TOTAL | $207,166,000 | $103,084,000 | $310,200,000 | |
Obviously, funding for the EAB program has fallen significantly. Nevertheless, funding for EAB continues to absorb a significant proportion of funding available for countering the full range of tree-killing pests. APHIS’ total funding for “tree and wood pests” is $54 million. Funding for this program is expected to decrease in the coming years – at the same time as the number of introduced pests continues to rise.
(Other programs funded under the “tree and wood pest” line item are the Asian longhorned beetle – which receives $35-40 million; and European gypsy moth – which receives $5-6 million. [Paul Chaloux, USDA APHIS, pers. comm. February 2017)
APHIS is actively considering ending the EAB regulatory program – which would allow the agency to reduce its costs significantly. (It is unclear whether APHIS would apply the money thus “saved” to other tree-killing pests. I have blogged frequently about pests that APHIS is not addressing.) APHIS would continue to support the biocontrol program.
Ending the regulatory program would probably speed up EAB’s arrival in those western states with significant ash resources. These include the northern Great Plains; the coastal mountains of Washington, Oregon, and California; and riparian areas of Utah and Arizona. For example, North Dakota has 78 million ash trees, which constitute half of trees in riparian woodlands and 60% of planted shelterbreaks.
A map showing areas of Oregon at risk is contained in my blog linked to above. The APHIS website contains a continental map showing areas with significant ash tree populations.
APHIS has already cut funding for EAB provided through the Farm Bill Section 100007 program. In Fiscal Year 2016, EAB programs received $285,000 through this program. Half went to academics for study of oviposition hosts or attractants. This funding dropped to $91,000 in FY17. This year, the funding is almost exclusively to academics studying the effect of EAB density and tree condition on parasitism by one of the biocontrol agents.
APHIS has pledged to continue supporting work on biocontrol programs targetting emerald ash borer.
USFS
The USDA Forest Service is also reducing its engagement on EAB: Forest Health Protection allocated only $240,000 in 2016; Research allocated a little under $1.2 million. USFS funding history is provided in the table below. It can be argued that the USFS has provided the necessary guidance to state, city, and local officials in preparing for EAB decimation of ash trees under their jurisdiction.
However, it is important that USFS Research funding be maintained to support such long-term restoration strategies as resistance breeding.
USFS Funding on Emerald Ash Borer, FY 2009-2016
| FY09 | FY10 | FY11 | FY12 | FY13 | FY14 | FY15 | FY16 | |
| EAB | $3.9 M | $6.4 M | $6.4M | $4.1 M | $2.8M | $1.8M | $1.7M | 1.4M |
Important projects are already not being funded; I blogged last year about the loss of funding for Dr. Pierluigi (Enrico) Bonello and others at Ohio State and Wright State University, who are trying to understand how Manchurian ash trees resist EAB attack.
Impact of EAB Deregulation — Whither Firewood Regulation?
If the federal EAB quarantine is eliminated, what will be the impact on federal and state efforts to discourage movement of firewood so as to protect the Nation from this and other pests?
EAB remains a threat to urban, rural, and wildland forests across the continent (including in Mexico) – and EAB continues to be moved in firewood. Furthermore, many other damaging insects and some pathogens can be transported in firewood.
Most of the state firewood regulations require a tie to specific pests – and EAB has been the principal species invoked. Can states maintain their regulations by anchoring them to other pests? Or based on the general threat? I hope so!
Deregulation of EAB seems likely to be the death knell for the APHIS effort to erect a nation-wide industry certification program for firewood. Certification already appears unlikely to be adopted; as I described in my blog in November), the costs of a certification program are higher than retailers are willing to support.
The educational messages recently placed on the Reservation.gov website are likely to remain. These alert campers making reservations at most National parks and many National forests to avoid moving firewood to slow the spread of tree-killing pests. These areas deserve continued protection. A full range of pests put them at risk, many of which are not regulated by APHIS, e.g., hemlock woolly adelgid and walnut twig beetle,
Posted by Faith Campbell
We welcome comments that supplement or correct factual information, suggest new approaches, or promote thoughtful consideration. We post comments that disagree with us — but not those we judge to be not civil or inflammatory.