Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team update

12 Pages·1999·4.2 MB·English

by  United States. Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team

Historic, Archive Document
Do not assume content reflects current
scientific knowledge, policies, or practices.

aSB762
.U552
= Forest Health Technology TEAM UPDATE
NTERPRISE
“Sprinc 1999
USDA Forest SERVICE, STATE AND Private FORESTRY, FOREST HEALTH PROTECTION, FOREST HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ENTERPRISE TEAM
Cooperation produces short course at.
,
national tribal timber symposium —— >
The Enterprise Team, the Central eX
Oregon Insect and Disease Service
Center, the Forest Management
Service Center (FMSC) and the
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
partnered to develop and present
a one-day short course on Forest
Vegetation Simulator (FVS) at the
twenty-third Annual National
“WILWIsISDSI]MINA,NAON IYA LGN A
Indian Timber Symposium held at
Kah-neeta Resort and Conference
Center, Warm Springs, Oregon.
FVS is a growth and yield model
used to project the effects of
various management activities Enterprise Team's Matt Oberle (then with Autometric Service Company) demonstrates a
within forest stands over time. It is feature of one of the Forest Vegetation Simulator insect and disease models.
supported by FMSC and available
as an analytical tool to natural forest insect and disease models as to many tribal economies and
resource managers throughout the extensions to FVS. cultures, interest in new and useful
United States and Canada. The science and forest management
Since wood fiber, recreational, and
tools is high. Sharing knowledge
Enterprise Team supports the
other social amenities produced by
development and maintenance of forests are significant contributors See Cooperation, page 2
Field staffs review landscape-
Inside...
based bark beetle model
Aerial spray model adds GIS
FHP Directors continue support
for aerial imagery program Representatives from Regional Project in 1992. The Enterprise Team
PTIPS moves to Enterprise Team Forest Health Protection units and took on the job of evaluating,
Maffei detail energizes Forest Service Research and Devel- testing, and improving the software
Team Communications opment met in March 1999 to created through that project. The
Study’s focus: future of address the status of the Westwide WWPB model is designed for use
microbial insecticides for control of Pine Beetle Model (WWPB), the with the Forest Vegetation Simula-
gypsy moth
meaning of preliminary results, and tor (FVS), the Forest Service’s
Haynes, Scrivner honored
future direction for the project. primary stand growth model. A
Editor departs
multi-stand, landscape impact
The complex and ambitious task of
Events of Interest model of the effects of pine bark
creating a WWPB Model began as a
Special Technology Development See Field staffs, page 2
Printed on Recycled Paper
Cooperation , from page 1 Field staffs from page 1
and skills among Tribal Council, and Mark Brown of the BIA, who beetles on western pine forests, the
BIA, and Forest Service can help were in charge of local arrange- WWPB model simulates impacts of
tribes maintain both healthy forests ments, said reactions to the training mountain pine beetle, western pine
and a healthy Tribal economy. were very positive and that FVS/ beetle, and Ips species on lodgepole
Suppose would be helpful in tribal and ponderosa pine.
Workshop attendees participated in
forest planning. A direct impact of
hands-on demonstrations of how Staffs discussed strengths and
the Warm Springs Training will be
FVS, together with the Insect and weaknesses of the WWPB and
the development of baseline trends
Disease Models, can be important decided that the Enterprise Team
for the current western spruce
decision support tools at a number should pursue integrating WWPB
budworm outbreak on the Yakima
of levels of forest planning, includ- with FVS and with Suppose, a
Indian Reservation using the
ing environmental assessments, late graphical user interface.
western spruce budworm model.
successional reserve analyses,
The effects of mistletoe will also be The Team will then work with the
watershed analyses, and forest
incorporated into the forest plan- Regions to further test and evaluate
plans. The training session took
ning for several other reservations. WWPB, which considers beetle
potential users through a series of
dynamics on the landscape or
increasingly complex exercises The short course can be brought to
watershed level (typically 5,000 to
demonstrating features of FVS, the your area as a two-day session with
50,000 acres), based on large-scale
Insect and Disease Models, and several options available. We can
beetle activities and forest condi-
Suppose, a graphical user interface provide local staff with the materi-
tions for groups of stands. The
for FVS. Primary resource emphasis als and exercises to put on the short
attempt to model these activities on
ranged from timber production to course themselves, or we can work
a larger scale is a departure from
the protection and development of with the local staff to prepare and
other FVS insect and disease
wildlife habitat. present the session. The Fremont
extensions, which model interac-
National Forest and Descinutes
Helen Maffei (Acting Enterprise tions at the stand level (typically 5
National Forest have already
Team Technology Transfer Program to 100 acres).
requested sessions. For more
Manager and Pathologist Central
information contact Helen Maffei Enhancements to WWPB are
Oregon Service Center); Judy
(541-383-5591 or hmaffei/ making the model more user-
Adams of the Enterprise Team;
r6épnw,deschutes) or Judy Adams friendly. The model creates outputs
Matt Oberle, contractor with
(970-498-1727 or jadams/wo,ftcol). that display data in ARC GIS
Autometric Service Company, who
systems to enable stand-by-stand
recently joined FMSC as a federal o
visualization of results.
employee; and Don Vandendriesche
of FMSC designed the Warm The Enterprise Team worked with
Springs short course. John Arena the Gunnison Service Center of the
Rocky Mountain Region to demon-
strate the use of the model on the
Piney project on the White River
National Forest. Enterprise Team
Program Manager, Dr. Eric L.
Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team Update is published each October, January, April, and
July by the USDA Forest Service Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team. It is distributed Smith, presented preliminary
free to professionals and others interested in the health of our forests. To submit items or to
simulation results using project
have your name added to the mailing list, call or write Update, Forest Health Technology
data. Further development will
Enterprise Team, USDA Forest Service, 3825 East Mulberry, Fort Collins, CO 80524. Phone: 970-
498-1500. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of incorporate feedback from meeting
program information should contact the USDA Office of Communications at 202-720-2791.
participants, and improvements
Opinions expressed in Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team Update are those of the writers
will allow more realistic representa-
and do not necessarily express USDA policy. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in
this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not tion of actual landscapes.
constitute an official endorsement or approval by USDA of any product or service to the
exclusion of others that may be suitable. USDA is an Equal Opportunity Employer. The USDA The consensus at the March meet-
Forest Service prohibits discrimination in its programs on the basis of race, color, national
ing was that WWPB could be useful
origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, and marital and familial status. (Not all
prohibited bases apply to all programs.) See Field staffs page 3
Field staffs from page 2
in analyzing alternative scenarios of
the interaction of beetle activity,
forest conditions, and management
options. The model’s structure also
A1vDsaIHAsONnAJS
lends itself to future use for other
bark beetles (e.g., Douglas-fir bark
beetles), as it allows consideration
of factors such as weather along
with hosts and pests, and because it
looks at the landscape level.
Oo
Dr. Eric Smith, Enterprise Team Quantitative Analysis Program Manager, discusses
Westwide Pine Beetle Model functions with Regional representatives. Andy Mason ,
Enterprise Team-FC Director, listens, right.
Aerial spray model adds GIS
Since the 1970s the USDA Forest Over the last three years, work has pesticide spray deposition pre-
Service has worked to increase the been ongoing to integrate pesticide dicted by the FSCBG model, onto
accuracy and safety of pesticide spray modeling into a Geographic an actual spray block as a map layer
application through the develop- Information System (GIS). Develop- in GypsES’ GIS. This integration
ment, evaluation, and validation of ers of FSCBG are collaborating with has evolved. Currently the model
computer models for simulating the developers of GypsES, (Gypsy user can combine the near-field
pesticide application. Because Moth Expert System, a software portion of the FSCBG model with
problems of access and size of spray decision support system used to actual flightlines downloaded
blocks make ground application support gypsy moth suppression directly from an in-cockpit Digital
impractical in many Forest Service and eradication projects) from the Geographic Positioning System
application scenarios, these efforts Southern Region and the Northeast- (DGPS) guidance system to yield a
have largely focused on aerial ern Area to integrate FSCBG into a map overlay of the spray deposi-
spraying. The information pesticide system with GIS capabilities. tion.
application models yield is typically
The GypsES model offers the ideal All of the USDA Forest Service
in mass /area over some specified
home for the spray models, as it is a spray modeling tools should be
area. The Forest Service Cramer-
GIS-based pest management tool. available at one web site sometime
Barry-Grim (FSCBG) model yields
Developed originally to aid in the in the year 2000. In the meantime,
mass (or droplets) /area across an
management of gypsy moth contact Dan Twardus of Northeast
idealized spray block. The model
outbreaks in the eastern U.S., it is Area Forest Health Protection
output is effectively spatial informa-
now used as a generic pest manage- (dtwardus/na,mo or dtwardus/
tion; however, currently model
ment platform. [email protected]) or Harold Thistle
users need to make the leap to
(hthistle/na,mo or hthistle/
overlay this information onto an Originally, integration of FSCBG
[email protected]) for more informa-
actual map base. into GypsES allowed users to
tion.
overlay the plume, that is, the
spacial representation of the qo
FHP Directors continue support for aerial
imagery program
Forest Health Protection Directors Several aircraft are available to the The team made recommendations
agreed to continue FHP remote program; however, most of these regarding FHP's regional and
sensing aerial photography pro- are not available during the field national needs for aerial imagery
grams at their current levels and to season. Only two are dedicated to and identified and evaluated
seek funding for replacement of a FHP remote sensing. The team alternative ways to address these
camera in the Southern Region and identified the general need to work needs. The review committee
recruitment of two trainee photog- with Aviation to ensure appropriate considered four alternatives: status
raphers at their April 1999 meeting. costs are being charged. Although quo, contracting all aerial image
A Forest Service team evaluated in-service projects presently cover acquisition, contracting aircraft and
alternatives to Forest Health costs of operation, replacement of pilot only, and maintaining the
Protection's current methods of depreciated equipment and training existing programs at their current
acquiring aerial imagery (sketch- of personnel are not factored into levels and capabilities. Evaluation
mapping excluded). project costs. Continuing the criteria for these alternatives were
direct cost, staffing,
The evaluation team
timeliness of response,
included representatives
knowledge and skill
from the Enterprise
base, and quality assess-
Team's Remote Sensing
ment and control. The
services Team, the
preferred alternative,
Remote Sensing Applica-
maintaining existing
tion Center (RSAC) and
programs at current
Forest Health Protection
levels and capabilities,
staff from the Southern ‘V31WFSsVGORMANSLAOLNARZ TI SI NG
would maintain quick
Region, Northeastern
response for partners and
Area, the Southwestern
stakeholders while
Region, the Pacific
NGGERESARESE ERO keeping the skill base for
Northwest Region, and oe
Jim Ellenwoo oft he Enterprise Team and Leonard L. Lucero of the these programs within
Alaska. The team, Southwestern Region during a break in the FHP Directors meeting. the Forest Service. This
meeting in Fort Collins,
alternative recognizes the
Colorado, early in February 1999,
current program without plans to need to replace aging equipment
identified current capabilities for
maintain and replace equipment either through excess property or
aerial image acquisition and
and train personnel would eventu- purchase. Also recognized are the
technology development related to
ally result in loss of equipment, need to provide trainee positions to
aerial imagery at the Enterprise
expertise, external partnerships, acquire skills that would be lost due
Team, RSAC, and the regions.
and ability to meet stakeholders’ to retirement in the near future.
Capabilities reviewed included
needs. The evaluation panel con-
aircraft, remote sensing equipment, FHP Directors adopted the
cluded that such program deterio-
and staffing. committee’s recommendation,
ration would also have negative
citing the program’s usefulness.
Although several FHP units have impacts on assessment and sup-
aerial imagery acquisition capabili- pression activities, as well as the o
ties, levels of capability vary. The rapid-response capability de-
team recognized a general need to manded in emergency scenarios
better coordinate the resources such as the recent blowdown on the
among the various units to ensure Routt National Forest and hurri-
that smaller, remote FHP units canes in the Southern Region.
receive needed services.
PTIPS moves to Enterprise Team
Forest Health Protection Directors
transferred administration of FHP’s
Pest Trend Impact Plot System
(PTIPS) to the Enterprise Team at its
April, 1999 meeting. The program
has been administered by Arizona
Zone Leader Borys Tkacz. Begun as
a Special Technology Development
project (STDP), PTIPS has been
‘WAsWSASaAM]4ISA,OANM 4NA L NY
supported and funded with STDP
funds for the past nine years. The
project established forest plots
throughout the West, together with
a database of information about the
impacts of forest insects and patho-
gens. The plot system was originally Borys TTk acz, center, ie Jerry Boughton (Alaska Region), at left,a nd
Richard Teck (Forest Management Service Center), right, at Forest Health
designed and will continue to be
Protection Directors meeting.
used for the validation and calibra-
tion of insect and disease models. recommended continuing PTIPS FHP Directors accepted these
The Enterprise Team and one of its and moving administration of the recommendations and determined
predecessors, the Methods Applica- project to Enterprise Team-Fort first, that the program be housed at
tion Group, contributed to the Collins. The committee also recom- the Enterprise Team-Fort Collins
development of the database mended that the program be site, and second, that the program
management system, which was expanded to include the East and be expanded to include the North-
recently incorporated into FSVEG, the South, that it be designated a eastern Area and the Southern
the Forest Service’s new database
national program, and that alterna- Region, depending on approval of a
system for field-sampled vegetation. tive funding sources be sought. The PTIPS implementation plan and
project now uses a substantial availability of funds. PTIPS will be
The most recent review of PTIPS
portion of annual funding for STDP, continued and additional STDP
conducted by the STDP Steering
which limits the support available funding will be sought to restore
Committee concluded that the
for other valuable technical devel- that program to the 1999 level.
project’s original objectives are still
opment projects.
valid and that PTIPS has made o
considerable progress toward
Maffei energizes Team
meeting them, especially in the
establishment and measurement of
plots. The system’s design is set up
communications
on different measurement sched-
ules, some annual, some longer
Helen Maffei, acting Technology Fort Collins in April 1999. Helen’s
term, depending on the appropriate
Transfer Program Manager in April, regular assignment is with the
time line for the pests being mea-
sured. Analysis for model validation is producing a promotional “suc- Insect and Disease Service Center,
and calibration will take more time, cesses” brochure on STDP. This Pacific Northwest Region, in Bend,
project, along with helping to Oregon. Her dynamo personality
as some plots are just now entering
conduct a training short course for and working style energized the
the appropriate status for validation
the Intertribal Timber Conference Enterprise Team during her stay
and calibration.
and shepherding Enterprise Team with us and continues to do so
The project provides useful informa- projects like the Update through the back at her Region 6 post.
tion for resource management in the production process, were the focus
Oo
West. The STDP Steering Committee of her detail at Enterprise Team-
Study’s focus: future of microbial
insecticides for control of gypsy moth
An Enterprise Team-Morgantown equivalents (sufficient quantity to Bacteria
microbial insecticide program treat 5,000 acres) of Gypchek per
The Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner
focuses on two goals: to develop year. Maintaining this level of
group of bacteria (commonly
and improve the efficacy of micro- production costs about $300,000 per
referred to as Bt) is used extensively
bial insecticides used to control year.
to control agricultural and forest
forest defoliators and to collect
The active ingredient (the virus) is insect defoliators as well as insect
information about the effects of
produced using a laboratory colony vectors of human and other mam-
these microbial insecticides on non-
of gypsy moth. Processed powder is malian transmissible disease. B.
target organisms. A nucleopolyhe-
tank mixed either with a commer- thuringiensis occurs naturally in
drosis virus (NPV) and a bacterium
cially produced carrier (Carrier 038, many species of agricultural and
are currently used to control gypsy
Abbott Laboratories) or with a forest insects and is a component of
moth, Lymantria dispar (L), in North
lignosulfonate-molasses formula- soil microbiota worldwide. Most
America.
tion—less costly but more difficult strains used in commercial produc-
Nucleopolyhedrosis to mix and apply. The tank mix is tion of microbial insecticides were
sprayed on foliage in the crowns of isolated from diseased insects. Bt
Virus
trees, where small gypsy moth does not cause epizootics without
NPVs are unrelated to viruses that larvae eat the contaminated foliage artificial application.
cause disease in humans and other and die. Larval cadavers then
Most formulations of Bt used to
mammals. Natural components of disintegrate and serve as inoculum
control defoliating Lepidoptera
their host's habitats, they can reach for healthy feeding larvae.
(butterflies and moths) in North
epizootic (epidemic)
American forests today are Bacillus
proportions even without
thuringiensis variety kurstaki (HD-1
artificial application.
strain) (Btk). Private industry
Typically, each affects a
producers, Abbott Laboratories and
narrow range of species.
Thermo Trilogy, produce large
These characteristics make
quantities of several formulations of
NPVs excellent candidates
the HD-1 strain of Btk for use
for use as insecticides; two
against gypsy moth. Like Gypchek,
such insecticides are
Btk is a stomach poison (insect
Gypchek and Disparvirus.
larvae eat the bacteria, get sick, and
Scientists isolated a strain
die; mere contact with the bacteria
of the gypsy moth NPV
does not kill larvae).
from a Connecticut
population of NPV-killed
Btk action is complex, and scientists
UFSoESRrDVeIsACt E
gypsy moth larvae. This are not sure exactly how it works.
Occlusion bodies of the gypsy moth nucleopolyhedrosis virus
“Hamden” strain is the Larval death is associated with both
under magnification.
active ingredient in the bacterial spores and crystals. In
product Gypchek, registered by the most lepidopteran pests, the cause
Transmission of gypsy moth NPV
U.S. EPA in 1978. The same active of death is smaller proteins released
occurs both within and between
ingredient is in the product in the insect's gut by the bacteria's
generations of the insect. Gypsy
Disparvirus, registered in Canada crystal component; the spore’s
moth NPV appears to have minimal
but not currently in production. effect is minimal. Scientists have
indirect effects on a few gypsy moth
documented direct and indirect
The USDA Animal and Plant
parasites, but scientists have not
impacts of Btk on various non-
Health Inspection Service and the documented effects on other non-
target Lepidoptera.
USDA Forest Service collaborate to target organisms.
produce approximately 5,000 acre
See Microbials,page 7
cS iP
u =<
a€ y
"ere % oe
Microbials, , from page 6
Btk-treated acres make up more larvae, although in most cases the other species of special concern).
than 99 percent of the acres treated affected species recovered by the This approach would be very
end of the expensive, because of the large
eEKg * aus ®
following year. number of species. Additional
Results of limitations apply to bioassays of Btk
laboratory effects on species of specific concern
bioassay because of their limited numbers
studies on a and because of restrictions on
limited num- collecting these species. Finally,
ber of native even if sufficient numbers were
Lepidoptera available, the results of laboratory
show that most bioassays may not accurately
of the small represent results in the field.
instar larvae
Still another possible solution is to
were suscep-
SUFEoSRrVDeIsACtE 5 SRL Se aS decrease the use of Btk and increase
Bacillus thuringiensis deposit and killed gypsy moth larvae on foliage. tible to Btk;
the use of Gypchek. But the future
susceptibility
for commercial production of
aerially with microbial insecticides of mid- or late instars is less clear.
Gypchek is not promising because
as part of the Federal and State Gypchek has not been implicated as
of the high costs of in vivo produc-
Cooperative Suppression, Eradica- impacting non-target Lepidoptera
tion and the limited market in
in either laboratory or field studies.
tion, and Slow-the Spread Pro-
forestry. Nor has the effort to
grams. Btk's large share of the total
Since Btk has been implicated as improve the efficacy of Gypchek by
program is dictated by its commer-
affecting lepidopteran larvae other developing more virulent natural
cial availability in large quantities,
than the target species, what can be and genetically engineered strains
in various formulations, and at done to maintain its level of use of gypsy moth NPV proven to be a
relatively low cost.
and lessen its impact on nontarget viable option.
In contrast, only one commercially species? One possible solution is to
Ongoing long-term
available tank mix of Gypchek is develop target-specific strains of
study
available. Gypchek quantity is Btk. Worldwide, more than 15
limited and its production cost manufacturers of biopesticides are An ongoing, long-term study
relatively high. A fairly large dose is developing natural strains of Bt; initiated by the National Center of
needed to provide consistent insect developing genetically manipulated Forest Health Management (now
mortality. In general, Gypchek takes strains of Bt; and transferring toxin- Enterprise Team-Morgantown) in
longer than Btk to cause gypsy coding genes into other bacteria (by 1994 aims to determine the impacts
moth larvae to stop feeding or die. cloning) or into selected plant of sequential treatments of Btk and
The product's effectiveness at low species, creating transgenic plants. Gypchek on selected groups of non-
host densities is not well docu- These approaches offer promise, targets located on a series of 500-
mented. but unfortunately the outlook for acre plots on the George Washing-
more species-specific Btk strains for ton National Forest in Virginia and
Aerial Application and
use in forestry is not good, at least the Monongahela National Forest in
Non-target Concerns for the next 5 years, because the West Virginia. The study monitored
market for Btk in forestry is so the replicated plots in 1995 and
During the past five years, concern
limited. 1996, before treatment. The plots
with real and perceived impacts of
were treated in 1997 and 1998.
aerially applied microbial insecti- Another possible solution is to
After-treatment monitoring fol-
cides on non-target Lepidoptera has conduct laboratory bioassays of Btk
lowed in 1998 and is scheduled for
increased. Previous field studies effects on a wide range of non-
1999 and 2000. This study should
implicated Btk as the cause of target lepidopteran species, espe-
help to supply some of the informa-
within-season depressions of cially on threatened or endangered
selected non-target lepidopteran species of Lepidoptera (as well as
See Microbials,page 8
oe 2;
oe <eof
Microbials, from page 5
should be given to mitigating
tion necessary to better our under-
standing of the effects of Btk and potential impacts of Btk on them.
Gypchek on non- We can estimate potential risk
targets. based on length of lethal
activity of Btk, laboratory
What next? |
bioassay data, and the
While the currently particular life stage of the
registered Btk . BIVOSSIHAINnNOTT oS n-target species present
products will during aerial applications of
continue to be used Btk. Unfortunately, much
to control gypsy information is needed about
moth, they must be geographical range, larval
aerially-applied host plants, and habitat
only after conduct- associations of nontarget
ing site-specific species. Meanwhile, program
biological evalua- personnel might consider
Aerial application of Bacillus thuringiensis to control gypsy moth.
tions of associated using a Btk formulation that is
non-target Lepi- more specific to gypsy moth
doptera and gypsy (e.g., Foray 48F) rather than
moth population formulations that impact a
characteristics. Once non-target broader range of lepidopteran
species are identified, thought species.
Oo
Haynes, Scrivner honored Editor
Georgia Sally Scrivner of departs
Haynes of Enterprise Team-
Enterprise Fort Collins
At the end of May, Shirley Wilsey
Team-Fort earned an award
(with Autometric Service Com-
Collins was for outstanding
pany), writer and editor-
recognized in support services
extraordinaire for the Enterprise
March with for the Forest
Team Update, will be moving to a
an “On-the- Health Protec-
new contract position with the
Spot” award tion Directors
Natural Resources Conservation
for support Sato I : Meeting hel;d at Service. Shirley has provided the
services to Georgia Haynes, Sally Scrivner,
Enterprise Team-FC Enterprise Team-FC Peenebaee Enterprise Team with years of
the Forest
perspicacity, perception, creativity,
Management Service Center Collins site in April 1999. Sally also
and attention to detail in reports,
(FMSC) and the Enterprise Team does yeoman service preparing
plans, papers, and poster sessions—
during 1998-1999. Georgia helped presentations and graphics for the
not to mention what she has done
FMSC with travel matters and with Update and other Enterprise Team
for our vocabularies! We will miss
conversion from the DG system to documents, poster displays, and
her patience. We will miss her
the IBM corporate system. She presentations.
humor. We will miss her hats.
handles a wide spectrum of support
o
duties for the Enterprise Team with oO
skill and aplomb.
Oo