Emerald Ash Borer—Save the Tree, Endanger the Ecosystem
ALL TEXT AND PHOTOS © Marlene A. Condon
Almost 20 years ago, I
attended a Virginia Outdoor Writers Association meeting that was held at
Mountain Lake near Virginia Tech [VT]. A VT entomologist led us on a walk
around the lake. He spoke about the systemic pesticide injections they were
using to try to save the hemlock trees from the overly populous nonnative
Hemlock Woolly Adelgid (Adelges tsugae) feeding on them.
A systemic pesticide is
one in which the active chemical ingredients are water soluble so that the
pesticide is absorbed by a plant and then circulates throughout the plant’s
system. It’s akin to the chemotherapy used to treat cancer patients, except
that instead of killing cells within the organism itself, as happens when a person is
treated, the chemical kills any critter feeding on any part of the poisonous
tree.
Therefore, I asked the
entomologist if he wasn’t concerned about this effect on nontarget species
(i.e., animals other than the adelgid). He answered that he’d never given it
any thought.
As the saying goes, most
folks can’t see the forest for the trees. They are so concerned about having to
act to save trees that they lose sight of the bigger picture: the effects of
their pesticide usage upon the ecosystem. The adelgid/hemlock scenario is now
being played out with the Emerald Ash Borer [EAB].
Scientists and
environmentalists alike argue that we cannot afford to lose our native trees
because they support native insects. But what is the ecological value of using
poison to keep alive an ash tree that will attract such critters
as the Tiger Swallowtail (the state insect/butterfly of five
states, including Virginia where I live) and then kill its caterpillars, among a multitude of other leaf-eating
insects?
The pesticide Emamectin,
recommended for EAB control, is widely used to eradicate “lepidopterous
pests”—the caterpillars of moths and butterflies. It doesn’t discriminate
between the larvae people want to get rid of and the ones they don’t.
Imidiclopid can be used instead, but this pesticide has been implicated in the
deaths of honey bees.
I’ve read that “Only about
two-thirds of a teaspoon of active ingredient is used to treat the entire
tree.” This statement suggests that the quantity of insecticide used is
insignificant, but the quantity isn’t important—the effect is.
A catastrophic result of
treating trees with an injected pesticide is that those trees become perpetual killing agents. In this time
of increased environmental consciousness, most folks understand that the wanton
extermination of non-targeted species is unsound.
You might think these
animals are doomed to die anyway if the ash trees aren’t rescued, but that’s
not necessarily true. Most of these insects are generalists that can feed upon
a variety of plant species, but they won’t be able to move along to other
plants if they are dispatched by the pesticide in your trees.
People shouldn’t be so
willing to accept the poisoning of the creatures upon which the functioning of
our environment depends. Rather than providing cost-share programs that
monetarily assist folks to exterminate numerous species of arthropods,
government should have spent its (our) money more wisely by paying citizens to
collect ash seeds that could have been preserved to be planted after borer
populations have plummeted—as they will.
As soon as large ash trees
are greatly reduced in number, most of the borers will starve for lack of a food
source. Meanwhile, a natural buildup of predator populations will have taken
place to keep remaining borer populations in check.
I’ve lived at my
nature-friendly and pesticide-free property for over 35 years, and native
predators have always kept the numbers of Gypsy Moth (Lymantria dispar) and
Japanese Beetle (Popillia japonica) limited to such a low level that I
rarely see them. They are not at all problematic for my plants.
It should be noted that
poisoning the Earth with chemicals has never solved nonnative-insect
problems. Despite spending many millions of taxpayer dollars on pesticides, we
still have Gypsy Moths (in the country since 1869) and Japanese Beetles (here
since 1916).
The course of action to
take cannot be based solely upon hysteria that makes people think, “We’ve got
to do something (anything!).” Mother Nature can handle this situation far
better than humans because the natural system of checks and balances works—far
more sensibly and safely than our misguided efforts with pesticides.
NATURE ADVICE:
You might want to reconsider
obtaining free leaves from friends and local government-run programs. Given people’s
propensity these days to employ pesticides, you may be adding poisons to your garden.
Yikes!
No comments:
Post a Comment