58th Annual Meeting of the CaliforniaForestPest Council
What’s Ailing California’s Forests?
Meeting Abstracts
November 17-18, 2009
Heidrick Ag Center, Woodland, California
About the CaliforniaForestPest Council (CFPC)
The California Forest Pest Council (CFPC) aims to foster education concerning forest pests and forest health, and advises the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection on forest health protection. It comprises a diverse group of forestry professionals and others interested in the prevention of damage to forests from insects, pathogens, animals, weeds, and pollution. Meetings are held throughout the state to discuss and evaluate current forest pest conditions. The annual meeting is the most important, providing the membership a chance to review what has happened in the last year, to formulate and vote on resolutions, and to address topics of special concern. Membership in the CFPC is granted to anyone attending. The CFPC is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation (tax-ID 94-3248518).
2009 Conference Organizers
Beverly Bulaon, Insect Committee Chairperson, USDA Forest Service- Stanislaus National Forest, Sonora, CA,
Kim Camilli, Council Secretary, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
Paso Robles, CA,
Susan Frankel, At-Large Director, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Albany, CA,
Stephen Jones, Council Treasurer, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
Sacramento, CA.
Martin MacKenzie, At-Large Director, Stanislaus National Forest, Sonora, CA
Don Owen, At-Large Director, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
Redding, CA.
Katie Palmieri, Council Editor in Chief, California Oak Mortality Task Force/UC Berkeley,
Bob Rynearson, Council Chairperson, W.M. Beaty & Associates, McArthur, CA
Tom Smith, Editorial Committee Chairperson, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Davis, CA.
Paul Zambino, Disease Committee Chairperson, San BernardinoNational Forest,
Technical Assistance
Janice Alexander, California Oak Mortality Task Force/UC Cooperative Extension, Marin, Novato, CA.
Program of Events Summary
What’s Ailing California’s Forests?
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
9:00 amRegistration
10:00 amInsect Committee Meeting (all are welcome)
Forest Insects in California
11:15 amLaws and Regulations
12:00 amLunch (provided)
1:00 pmDisease Committee Meeting (all are welcome)
Forest Diseases in California
3:10 pmPoster Session, “Stump the Experts,” and Social
4: 30 pmAdjourn
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
7:45 amRegistration and Continental Breakfast
8:45 amWelcoming Remarks
9:00 amWhat’s Ailing California’s Forests?
10:00 amBreak
10:30 amWhat’s Ailing California’s Forests? continued
12:00 pmLunch (provided)
1:00 pmCA Forest Pest Council Business Meeting and Elections
1:30 pmFirewood: A Risk to CaliforniaForest Health?
2:45 pmBreak
3:00 pmAspen and Alder Issues
3:45 pmInvited Papers - Other Forest Health Challenges
4:30 pmAdjourn
Oral Presentation Abstracts
(In Agenda Order)
Evaluation of Multiple Funnel Traps and Stand Characteristics for Estimating Western Pine Beetle-Caused Tree Mortality
Christopher J. Hayes and Christopher J. Fettig,Sierra Nevada Research Station, Pacific Southwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Davis, CA 95618;; and Laura D. Merrill, Environmental Science Division, U.S. Army Garrison, Yuma Proving Ground, Yuma, AZ 85365
The western pine beetle (WPB), Dendroctonus brevicomis LeConte, is a major cause of ponderosa pine, Pinus ponderosa Dougl. ex Laws., mortality in much of western North America. This study was designed to quantify relationships between WPB trap catches [including those of its primary invertebrate predator, Temnochila chlorodia (Mannerheim)], and levels of tree mortality attributed to WPB at 44 trapping sites (stands) and within five general locations (forests) in California. Furthermore, we evaluated relationships between forest stand characteristics and levels of WPB-caused tree mortality. Preliminary analyses were conducted by Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) using tree mortality/ha and % tree mortality and 10 potential predictor variables. All predictor variables that had significant correlations [WPB/d, WPB: T. chlorodia, % WPB (percentage of total trap catch represented by WPB), trees/ha, basal area of all tree species, basal area of P. ponderosa, mean diameter at breast height and stand density index] were considered for linear and multiple linear regression models for predicting levels of WPB-caused tree mortality. Our results suggest monitoring WPB populations through the use of pheromone-baited multiple funnel traps is not an effective means of predicting levels of WPB-caused tree mortality. However, levels of WPB-caused tree mortality can be efficiently predicted (Adj. R2 >0.90) at large spatial scales (forests; 3,000 to 14,000 ha of contiguous host) by simply measuring stand density, specifically the basal area of all tree species or stand density index. The implications of these results to forest management are discussed.
Managing Slash to Minimize Colonization of Residual Trees by Ips and Other Bark Beetle Species
Christopher J. Fettig, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, 1731 Research Park Drive, Davis, CA, 95618; ; Tom DeGomez, University of Arizona, Flagstaff, AZ; Joel D. McMillin and John A. Anhold, USDA Forest Service, Forest Health Protection, Flagstaff, AZ; and Christopher J. Hayes and Stephen R. McKelvey, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Placerville, CA
In the western U.S., thinning is advocated by land managers as a means of reducing fuel loads, improving residual tree growth, and as a preventive measure for reducing subsequent amounts of bark beetle-caused tree mortality. The thinning prescriptions are quite diverse, and their application can result in significantly different stand structures. In most cases large amounts of downed material (i.e., slash) are created and left in the field, due to lack of developed markets for small diameter trees. This material, if left on the ground, has inherent value and ecological functions (e.g., nutrient cycling and wildlife habitat), while at the same time creates host material for many bark beetle species, specifically those in the genus Ips. Forest managers and forest health specialists tend to agree that fresh slash left untreated on the forest floor increases risks from bark beetle infestations, but those who are managing for other forest attributes are prone to recommend leaving some of the slash untreated to serve as habitat for a variety of fauna that contribute to a healthy forest condition (DeGomez et al. 2008).
This presentation details treatment options and guidelines for managing slash to minimize bark beetle activity in response to thinning treatments. We focus on ponderosa pine, but borrow knowledge gained from work in other cover types. While the primary focus is on engraver beetles (Ips spp.), we also include information on other bark beetle species associated with slash (e.g., Dendroctonus species such as western pine beetle and red turpentine beetle). For more information, we refer the reader to DeGomez et al. (2008).
Reference
DeGomez, T.; C.J. Fettig; J.D. McMillin; J.A. Anhold; and C. Hayes. 2008. Managing slash to minimize colonization of residual leave trees by Ips and other bark beetle species following thinning in southwestern ponderosa pine.Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Bulletin AZ1448. 21 p.
Verbenone-Plus: A New Tool for Protecting Trees from Bark Beetle Attack
Steve McKelvey,USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Placerville CA; ;Chris Fettig, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Davis CA;Dezene P.W. Huber, University of Northern British Columbia, Ecosystem Science and Management Program
Bark beetles are major components of forest ecosystems. Some bark beetles periodically become so abundant that they threaten ecological, economic, social, or aesthetic values. Typically susceptible host are located by pioneering beetles that subsequently produce pheromones that attract conspecifics. A mass attack ensues which most often results in the death of the host.
Verbenone is a semiochemical that has been found to inhibit the attraction of several economically important bark beetles to their pine host during attack and colonization. Verbenone is naturally produced by the auto-oxidation of the host monoterpene α-pinene, by the beetles themselves, and/or by degradation of host material by associated fungi transmitted by the beetles. Synthetic verbenone has been evaluated as a tool for mitigating pine mortality due to bark beetle infestations. In western North America, efforts have concentrated on single tree or small scale stand protection, primarily from mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosaeHopkins, infestations. Results have been favorable but inconsistent.
We have conducted several trapping bioassays using non-host angiosperm volatiles (NAV) in addition to verbenone and have demonstrated a significant enhancement of the inhibitory effect compared to verbenone alone. Our initial trapping bioassay consisted of nine NAV’s in combination with verbenone. Subsequent trapping bioassays to test the efficacy of each individual component, in cooperation with Contech Enterprises Inc., Victoria, BC, Canada, has resulted in a reduced four component blend of NAV’s. We tested this reduced blend, that we call verbenone-plus (VP), as a tool to protect individual ponderosa pine, Pinus ponderosa Dougl. Ex Laws, trees from western pine beetle, Dendroctonus brevicomis LeConte, attack. Seventy-five trees that were separated >100 m were selected in the ModocNational Forest in northern California and were randomly assigned one of three treatments (25 trees/treatment): 1) the four component VP blend; 2) a previously revised blend (RB), consisting of nine components; and
3) an untreated control. All trees were baited with a western pine beetle tree bait (Contech Enterprises, Victoria, BC, Canada) consisting of the attractant pheromones frontalin and exo-brevicomin and the host monoterpene myrcene for four weeks to rigorously test the efficacy of these treatments. Final assessments of tree mortality were conducted twelve months later. All 25 of the untreated control trees died while only 15 and 7 of the RB and VP trees respectively died. Given the efficacy of the VP blend for protecting individual trees, we plan to further test the efficacy of the VP blend as a tool for small scale stand protection.
California Department of Pesticide Regulation Enforcement Response Regulations
Scott A. Johnson, Wilbur-Ellis Company, P.O. Box 15289, Sacramento, CA95851-0289;
The California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) formalized their Enforcement Response Regulations in late 2006. Title 3, California Code of Regulations sections 6128 and 6130 specify the appropriate and required enforcement responses/actions (section 6128) that county agricultural commissioners must take for specific classes of violations (section 6130) in specific situations. The regulations strengthen environmental enforcement and improve statewide consistency of enforcement responses used by the counties.
The term “Enforcement response” means the legal requirement for the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) and the county agricultural commissioners to apply enforcement authority fairly, consistently, and swiftly in order to realize the full benefit of a statewide pesticide regulatory program. There are two types of enforcement responses -- compliance actions and enforcement actions.
A “Compliance action” is an action taken by the county agricultural commissioner in response to a violation of the law or regulations. Examples of compliance actions include violation notices, warning letters, documented compliance interviews, and noncompliance(s) noted on an inspection form. A compliance action also includes public protection actions such as cease and desist orders (by itself), seize or hold product or produce orders, and prohibit harvest orders.
An “Enforcement action” is an action taken by the county agricultural commissioner in response to a violation of the law or regulations. They include agricultural and structural civil penalties (monetary fines); the suspension or revocation of a business’ county registration, a private applicator’s certificate to apply or supervise the use of a restricted material, and a property operator’s restricted materials permit; and civil and criminal court action. An enforcement action must provide the respondent/violator with notice and an opportunity to be heard before a sanction or penalty is enforced.
A “Decision report” is a written explanation and record of a county agricultural commissioner’s decision not to take an enforcement action in accordance with the standards outlined in the enforcement response regulations (section 6128). A decision report must be submitted to the Director within 30 days of the date of the compliance action. If the Director does not concur with the commissioner’s decision, the Director shall notify the commissioner within 30 days of the receipt of the decision report and specify reasons for the denial. The commissioner shall then take an enforcement action.
Details of sections 6128 may be found online at:
Details of sections 6130 may be found online at:
New DNA Assay to Detect Important Wood Decay Fungi
Matteo Garbelotto, Department of Environmental Science Policy and Management, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 94720;
Every year tree failures cause property damage and personal injury, exposing municipalities and local governments to significant liability. The University of California at Berkeley, in conjunction with the University of Turin, Italy, have developed a state-of-the-art assay that allows for the identification of wood decay agents even in standing trees. This test represents the new gold standard for the identification of decay fungi, and can be used both on standing trees, in order to prevent failures, as well as failed trees, to understand the underlying causes of the failure. Unlike other methods it identifies the unique genetic fingerprints of disease organisms and can detect the presence of multiple invasive species in a tree.
Introducing the National Ornamental Research Site at DominicanUniversity of California
Kathy Kosta and Cheryl Blomquist, CDFA, 3294 Meadowview Road, Sacramento, CA95832;
The three and half year search for a suitable site to do research on the diseases of ornamentals caused by Phytophthora ramorum is finally over. Funding from the Farm Bill was secured through the hard work and diligence of a number of people, including the National Plant Board, and the landscape industry. Nearly one million dollars has been set aside to support this desperately needed research. Studies may now be completed under the real world conditions that are conducive to the development of the diseases caused by P. ramorum.
Located in the heart of MarinCounty, DominicanUniversityof Californiaprovides not only the perfect climatic conditions for disease development, but the staff on campus has embraced the project with tremendous enthusiasm. The expertise within the Facilities Management and Grounds Management Divisions has proven to be invaluable. Having the laboratories and scientific expertise on campus available to our researchers is an extra bonus that was not considered during the quest for the site. It is clear now that with the help of the staff at Dominican this project will be a world class research project. The project is funded for five years with visions of future funding to support research on quarantine or other important pests.
The project, initially conceived by Drs. Nik Grunwald and Jennifer Parke, will be lead by Dr. Sibdas Ghosh at Dominican and Dr. Russ Bulluck, USDA/APHIS/CPHST. A Steering Committee composed of the chairs of subcommittees will lead the direction of the research and operation of the facility. Committees composed of stakeholders and interested parties have been developed to represent concerns across the country and internationally. Once the study site is completed, researchers will be invited to submit proposals for research to be completed at the site. The research committee will complete the reviews and forward their recommendations to the Steering Committee. The Executive Committee will make the final decision on chosen proposals. Due to the limitations on space at the site, only a select few studies will be under operation at one time. Initially, one study will be implemented until more plots can be prepared.
The study plots are being designed with maximum flexibility to accommodate researchers’ needs. As biosecurity is the primary focus, the site will be designed to prevent any escape of the pathogen into the environment, and will be operated under extremely rigid phytosanitary safeguards. The Best Management Practices for Nursery Production will be implemented as standard operating procedures, providing an opportunity to test and refine them.
Climbing the Disease Curve - Seasonal Variation in Phytophthora lateralis Sporeload in Southwest Oregon Watersheds
Frank Betlejewski, USDA Forest Service, Southwest Oregon Forest Insect and Disease Service Center, 2606 Old Stage Road, Central Point, OR 97502;
Port-Orford-cedar (Chamaecyparis lawsoniana) is native to an area along the PacificCoast from Coos Bay, Oregon, to the mouth of the MadRiver near Arcata, California. Its range extends from the coast to about 50 miles inland. There is also a small disjunct population in the ScottMountains of California.
Phytophthora lateralis (PL) is a virulent, non-native pathogen. It was introduced into the native range of Port-Orford-cedar (POC) in the early 1950s and its place of origin is unknown. It readily kills POC of all ages that are growing on sites favorable for infection. Nearly always fatal to the trees it infects, research shows the spread of the pathogen is linked, at least in part, to transport of spore-infested soil by human and other vectors. Water-borne spores then readily spread the pathogen downslope and downstream.
Infection by PL is greatly favored by cool conditions and requires the presence of wateraround POC roots for at least several hours. Optimal temperatures for infection are between 50° and 68°F. Most POC are infected by the pathogen in the cool, wet parts of the year. Very little infection occurs in the dry, warm summer months.
Sixteen PL baiting sites were established near the town of Williams, in southwest Oregon, in 2007. Four baiting sites were selected in Powell Creek, Munger’s Creek, Lone Creek, and Glade Fork, all sixth field watersheds. The sites were immediately above the infection, immediately downstream of the infection, 0.25 miles downstream of the infection and 0.75 miles downstream the infection. Sites were baited six times over the course of one year with 12 susceptible POC seedlings. Initial PL screening was conducted at the Southwest Oregon Forest Insect and DiseaseServiceCenter and those seedlings identified as potentially infected were sent to OregonStateUniversity for PL confirmation by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing.
Each sixth field watershed had its own unique PL signature. Preliminary review of the data indicates that the location of the infection level on the disease curve plays a role in the annual PL sporeload for that stream.