CalEPPCNews
Protecting California’s Natural Areas
from Wildland Weeds
Vol. 10, No. 4, Winter 2002
Quarterly newsletter of the California Exotic Pest Plant Council
Here’s to the volunteers! In honor of all those who lend their hands to managing invasive plants in the
field—like these girls removing Scarlet wisteria Sesbania punicea seed pods along the American River—
this issue of Cal-EPPC News features photos from the Sacramento Weed Warriors, an environmental
stewardship project of the California Native Plant Society’s Sacramento Valley Chapter. Volunteers
ranging in age from 7 to 84 logged more than 6,000 hours in the project’s first year. They come from
schools and colleges, AmeriCorps, youth groups, neighborhood organizations, churches, businesses, and
government agencies. Says Frank Wallace, the Weed Warriors’ coordinator, “Government land managers
are beginning to see the enormous potential for volunteer workers. As a former educator, I also see the
great potential for combining stewardship and environmental education for our younger generation. One
misperception that continues to be a challenge is that our sponsors often seem to believe that a volunteer
program should be free! I emphasize to our sponsors that volunteer programs need paid leadership who
ensure that work is done according to professional standards and who provide sustainability of services.
Once you have that in place, volunteer services can be very cost-effective, while providing all the
intangibles that benefit our schools and our communities over the long term.”
Inside:
Testing natural-based
herbicides for roadside
vegetation control
Remote sensing of Arundo
Hypericum canariense
update
From the Director’s Desk
California
Exotic Pest Plant
Council
1442-A Walnut Street, #462
Berkeley, CA 94709
(510) 525-1502
www.caleppc.org
A California 501(c)3 nonprofit organization
Our Mission
CalEPPC works to protect
California’s natural areas
from wildland weeds through
research, restoration, and education.
Executive Director
Doug Johnson
dwjohnson@caleppc.org
Board of Directors
Joe DiTomaso (President)
UC Davis Weed Science Program
Steve Schoenig (Vice President)
California Dept. of Food & Agriculture
Mona Robison (Secretary)
UC Davis Weed Science Program
Becky Waegell (Treasurer)
The Nature Conservancy
Mike Kelly (Past President)
Friends of Penasquitos
Alison Stanton
BMP Ecosciences
Carl Bell
UC Cooperative Extension
Once again, the Symposium was a rousing success, a great exchange of information and
inspiration! Thanks to everyone that made it happen, especially those who presented
talks and posters and the sponsors who provided financial support.
Speaking of sponsors, the list of institutional supporters in the last issue of Cal-EPPC
News accidentally left out Mike Krebsbach of Monsanto. He has been one of our most
consistent supporters, and we want to be sure to give him credit here. His contributions not only helped keep conference costs low, but also helped print the 2003
Wildland Weeds of California calendar.
Herbicides—now there’s a topic for you. Most restorationists conclude that we cannot
come close to stemming the tide of invasive plants without using herbicides in certain
situations, and that the research and experience with particular products has shown
them to be ecologically safe. Environmental purists, on the other hand, argue that we
cannot know everything about the environmental fate of herbicides, and that it’s
unwise to use materials with any potential for detrimental effects. It is a topic worthy of
constructive dialogue.
This issue of Cal-EPPC News features an update on Steve Young’s research on naturalbased herbicides as alternatives for Caltrans roadside management. His work shows
several things: first, formulations of common materials such as clove oil can provide
weed control; and second, such alternatives cost a lot more than synthetic herbicides,
especially since they typically require multiple applications.
We also present some interesting early results from a remote sensing project that is
enabling inventory of Arundo over large areas from aerial imagery. And speaking of
Arundo, we hear from the questionable ideas department that the SamoaPacific mill on
Humboldt Bay is proposing to grow Arundo agriculturally as a source of pulp for
paper. It might slow down the logging on our forests, but the potential to spread
rhizomes is frightening. Perhaps they could use the mill to process eucalyptus pulp
instead! We’ll keep you posted.
Carla Bossard
St. Mary’s College
Matt Brooks
USGS Western Ecological Resource Center
Paul Caron
Caltrans
Tom Dudley
UC Berkeley Dept. of Integrative Biology
Dawn Lawson
US Navy Facilities
Peter Warner
California State Parks
Scott Steinmaus
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
Bill Winans
San Diego County Watershed Management
CalEPPC News
Winter 2002 – Volume 10, Number 4
Editor: Doug Johnson, dwjohnson@caleppc.org
CalEPPC News is published quarterly by the California
Exotic Pest Plant Council. Articles may be reprinted
with permission from the editor. Submissions are
welcome. We reserve the right to edit all work.
2
CalEPPC News
Winter 2002
Bringing people together under a big tent Lunch outside at the 2002 Symposium in
Sacramento, October 11-13.
Wildland Weed NewsNewsNewsNewsNews
Sciencedaily.com (8/13/02) reports that
researchers using systematics and
phylogeography are tracing the Eurasian
source of invasive saltcedar (Tamarix
spp.) in the U.S. DNA sequencing helps
identify species and document hybridization, which may help researchers find
host-specific insect biocontrol agents.
SB 1573, introduced by California State
Senator Betty Karnette (D-San Pedro)
creates an Interagency Aquatic Invasive
Species Council that will develop a
comprehensive plan to address the
increasing impacts of aquatic invasive
species in California. SB 1573 was signed
by Gov. Davis on September 15, 2002.
A study in Science (8/9/02) reports that
habitat destruction costs the world $250
billion each year. A network of global
nature reserves would ensure the delivery
of environmental goods and services
(including climate regulation, water
filtration, soil formation, and sustainably
The National Aquatic Invasive Species
Act (NAISA) of 2002 has been introduced in Congress by Sen. Levin (D-MI),
Rep. Gilchrest (R-MD), and Rep. Ehlers
(R-MI). The act reauthorizes and
strengthens the National Invasive Species
Act of 1996, which regulated ballast
discharge from commercial vessels and
importations of live organisms. The
current bill creates a national monitoring
network, and sets aside funding for rapid
response and state and regional grants.
“If you are thinking of planting
pyracantha or cotoneaster—
both invasive and cliches besides—be a sport and plant
toyon instead.”
Ron Sullivan, San Francisco Chronicle,
10/5/02, Home & Garden section
harvested plants and animals) worth at
least $400 trillion more each year than
the goods and services from their converted counterparts. Author interview at
http://ens-news.com/ens/aug2002/200208-09-07.asp
New research has found that wildlife
corridors enhance crucial plant-animal
interactions in fragmented habitats. By
influencing bird and insect behavior, such
corridors increase pollen flow and seed
dispersal, crucial means of genetic
exchange between habitat fragments.
[Procedures for the National Academy of
Science, 9/16/02]
In an attempt to reduce the introduction
of invasive plants, staff at the Santa Rosa
Plateau Ecological Reserve located at the
southern end of the Santa Ana Mountains
have put brushes at each trailhead along
with signs that explain to hikers why they
should clean their boots prior to hiking.
[Bakersfield Californian, 9/26/02, p. B-1]
On October 2, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (RVA), Chairman of the Agriculture
Subcommittee on Departmental Operations, Oversight, Nutrition, & Forestry
held a hearing to review federal agency
performance in monitoring and preventing the introduction of invasive species,
and to look for ways to better coordinate
the organizations involved in the National
Invasive Species Council, co-chaired by
the Departments of Agriculture, Interior
and Commerce.
Symposium DPR Credits
If you signed the sheet at the Symposium and submitted a scantron form
you will receive 2 hours of “laws and
regulations” credit and 7 hours of
“other” credit. Use DPR code
numbers A-1437-02 and A-1438-02.
If you also attended the field trip,
signed the sheet and submitted a
scantron form, you will receive an
additional 5 hours of “other” credit.
Use DPR code number A-1439-02.
Help from knapweed?!
Friendly weed folk From left, Jake Sigg, Exotics Chair for the California Native Plant Society; Carla Koop, Watershed Coordinator
for Alhambra Creek; Lia Hull, Executive Coordinator of the Golden Gate Biosphere Reserve Association; Alison Stanton, consultant
with BMP Ecosciences and CalEPPC boardmember; and Katy Zaremba of the Coastal Conservancy’s Invasive Spartina Project.
[photos by Sara Marcellino]
CalEPPC News
Winter 2002
3
Current Cartography
New remote sensing
tool under evaluation
Marc R. Horney
Many of us would dearly like to have a mapping tool
capable of searching an aerial photo or a satellite image and
accurately pinpointing the location of every invasive weed
in the scene. Used every few years it could provide
information on the extent of infestation and the rate and
direction of spread (or retreat) and help inform our
strategies for implementing control. Unfortunately, that
day is not quite here yet—but it may be getting closer.
In the last few years, researchers have successfully
demonstrated techniques for detecting several invasive
weed species by using computers to “classify” plants based
on the characteristics of solar energy reflected by their
leaves or flowers. A common limitation of these techniques
is that unique relationships between solar reflectances and
plant species must be established for each individual
image. That isn’t a great obstacle for researchers, but it can
be a practical problem for project managers mapping weed
infestations on a landscape- or watershed-scale where tens
to hundreds of images may need to be processed. One way
around that difficulty is simply to manually map weed
infestations from high-resolution aerial photos. A great deal
of vegetation mapping has been done that way over the
years, but it can take a considerable amount of time, it
requires very good imagery, and it is subject to the skill of
the photo interpreter and the physical distinctiveness of
the target weed species.
One possible alternative to these practices may be a
new spectral analysis procedure being developed by
ERSAR, INC. of Lincoln, NE. Instead of classifying plant
canopies in terms of their solar reflectance characteristics,
the ERSAR analysis processes the reflectance data to
produce quantitative estimates of specific pigment concentrations, canopy cover and leaf architecture. The developer
describes the analysis as being robust to background, solar
and view angle effects, allowing classifications based on
plant biophysical properties to be uniformly applied to
ERSAR output from different images.
Several tests of the ERSAR procedure have been
conducted in Colusa and Glenn Counties in 2000 and
2001. In 2000 the ERSAR analysis was used to classify
Arundo donax and Yellow starthistle from IKONOS 4meter 4-band satellite imagery. In 2001 the same procedure was used to detect perennial pepperweed using 1meter 6-band digital aerial imagery, and to reclassify the
Arundo from 2-meter 6-band digital aerial imagery. Results
so far indicate that while the Yellow starthistle classification
system did not capture low-to-moderate density infesta-
4
CalEPPC News
Winter 2002
tions well using IKONOS data, the higher resolution perennial
pepperweed and arundo classifications both performed satisfactorily. While the coarser resolution IKONOS imagery was adequate
for detecting large arundo colonies, it generally failed to allow
detection of arundo plants presenting less than 8m of pure
canopy in sensor view. On the perennial pepperweed project, an
attribute set defined for pepperweed in an image from a wetland
site at the Colusa Wildlife Refuge was successfully used to detect
pepperweed in another image acquired over an agricultural area
(fallow fields, orchards and field crops) 5km away.
Future plans include stepping ERSAR trials up to a watershed
scale to determine how effective and usable the procedure is for
processing larger image sets. Funding for this research was
provided by a grant from the UC Center for Pest Management
Research and Extension. Reports on the ERSAR evaluation trials
will be available by the end of 2002.
Dr. Horney is Natural Resources Management & Range Livestock
Production Advisor for the University of California Cooperative
Extension in Colusa, Glenn and Tehama Counties. Contact him at
(530) 865-1154 or
From the air The remote sensing techniques was used at a
site along the Sacramento River (lower photo). Arundo was
detected from a characteristic “signature” in aerial photos using 6
frequency bands. The blue areas in the upper photo mark
patches of Arundo as determined by the classification software.
Feature
Exploring alternative methods for vegetation
control and maintenance along roadsides
By Steve L. Young
UC Hopland Research & Extension Center
The California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) manages
approximately 15,000 miles of highway
and more than 230,000 acres of right-ofway throughout the state. A major
portion of the management and maintenance effort is associated with vegetation
control. This need is driven by safety
concerns, such as ensuring visibility of
traffic and highway structures and
minimizing fire potential by reducing
vegetative biomass. Additionally, vegetation control provides benefits by reducing
the presence of noxious weeds and other
pests, and it is a major component of
erosion control.
Reducing herbicide use on
roadsides
The use of herbicides on Caltransmanaged acreage has raised concerns of
environmental quality, public health, and
worker safety, especially in the North
Coast area of California. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was completed in
late 1992 which assessed the risks of the
agency’s use of chemical vegetation
control programs (Jones & Stokes 1992).
Following the issuance of this document,
Caltrans adopted an integrated vegetation
management program and set goals for
reduction of chemical use: a 50%
reduction by 2000, and an 80% reduction
by 2012 (Jones & Stokes 1997). Currently, Caltrans District 1 has severely
limited its use of herbicides within two
counties (Mendocino and Humboldt)
within its district borders. Alternative
methods of vegetation control need to be
developed and proven effective in a variety
of types of plant communities and
climates in order for Caltrans to be able to
continue its mandate in these counties
and elsewhere.
Caltrans approached UC Hopland
Research & Extension Center to conduct
research on alternatives to conventional
herbicides. The primary aspect of this
research has focused on the many naturalbased (non-synthetic) products that can
be used for vegetation control. These
products are typically either compounds
derived from plants or combinations of
ingredients that are naturally found in the
environment (i.e. acetic acid, pine oil and
pelargonic acid). They have several
features that make them desirable for
herbicidal-type applications. Most of the
natural-based products are organic or
non-synthetic, have a low toxicity rating,
and are fast-acting with a short residual
life on plant or soil material. Many carry a
food grade rating and are exempt from
regulation by the EPA.
Researching natural-based
products
These natural-based products also
have disadvantages that have made their
use to date relatively uncommon. Unlike
commercial herbicides that translocate
within a plant’s tissue, most natural-based
products are contact inhibitors that do
not translocate within the plant. The
treated plant, unless it’s a young seedling,
is not killed unless a major portion of the
tissue is contacted. Any uncontacted
tissue containing actively growing plant
cells will continue to grow, depending on
the severity of injury and size of plant.
Thus, for control of vegetation, a high
volume of these substances is required,
along with repeat applications to kill new
shoots or recovering plant tissue. To date
these drawbacks have been assumed to
restrict the practical utility of these
products along roadsides. Therefore, we
initiated scientific testing of these naturalbased products to determine their efficacy
and economic feasibility in roadside and
rangeland settings. Specifically, the
objectives of these studies were to
determine: (1) the rate and timing of
application that provides control of the
target vegetation and (2) the costs
associated with the use of natural-based
products for vegetation control.
The final report on this research, to be
completed in December 2002, will
provide a documented assessment of the
effectiveness of vegetation control
treatments that may serve as alternatives
to currently registered herbicides for use
along Caltrans roadsides. The selected
research reported here represents the main
greenhouse and field studies on naturalbased products that were conducted for
the multi-year project (see tables next
page). Results from the remaining field
studies will be included in the final
report.
Corn gluten meal as a preemergence treatment
Corn gluten meal (CGM), the protein
fraction of corn and a byproduct of corn
wet-milling, is a natural-based granular
applied material. Research at Iowa State
University has shown CGM, which is
10% nitrogen by weight, to be an
effective preemergence weed control
treatment in turf grass settings (Christians
1993; Bingamen and Christians 1995;
McDad and Christians 2000).
We conducted trials at two types of
sites: one dominated by annual grasses,
the other dominated by French broom
(Genista monspessulana) and Jubata grass
(Cortaderia jubata). Each site was mowed
to a height of less than 4 in. prior to
treatment application. Treatments
consisted of CGM alone (at several
different levels), CGM with compost,
compost alone, standard synthetic
herbicide Gallery (isoxaben) with
Surflan (oryzalin), as well as untreated
continued next page…
CalEPPC News
Winter 2002
5
roadside alternatives…
…continued from preivous page
control plots. In order to completely
analyze the effectiveness of corn gluten
and compost on vegetation control, we
used both quantitative (point frame) and
qualitative (visual control and vigor)
methods, converting data for statistical
analyses.
Initial indications after one year’s
worth of data suggest that the highest rate
of CGM alone (1000 lbs/1000 ft2) was
the most effective treatment for controlling vegetation at both types of sites.
Lower rates (250 and 500 lbs/1000 ft2
with and without compost) did not
consistently control vegetation for all
locations. The addition of compost as
mulch to all treatments played a role in
lowering weed pressure, especially at the
annual grass sites. Following the first year
of this two-year experiment, the cost of a
roadside application of 1000 lbs/1000 ft2
of CGM came to $22,000/acre. The cost
of a standard synthetic treatment of
isoxaben at $88/lb (at a rate of 1.25 lb/
acre) and oryzalin at $37/gal (at 1 gal/
acre) would equal approximately $147/
acre. Even if CGM were used at low rates
and just in urban interchanges, the price
differential is sizable.
Post-emergence treatments for
annuals
The use of the natural-based products
acetic acid, pine oil, ammoniated soap of
fatty acids and citrus distillate were
compared to glyphosate (RoundUp ) for
control of annual vegetation in roadsides
or rangelands. Plots were established
along a roadside right-of-way in formerly
grazed rangeland dominated by a variety
of exotic annual grasses including foxtail
fescue (Vulpia myuros), hare barley
(Hordeum leporinum), medusahead
(Taeniatherum caput-medusae), ripgut
brome (Bromus diandrus), soft chess
(Bromus hordeaceus) and slender oat
(Avena barbata). There was a limited
amount of broadleaf filaree (Erodium
botrys). The treatments were broadcastapplied twice, except for glyphosate and
fatty acids, starting April 11, 2001. Prior
to re-applications on May 17, weed
6
CalEPPC News
Winter 2002
control was evaluated visually. Due to
weather-related early senescence of all
other species prior to the second application, only control of slender oat,
medusahead and hare barley was evaluated.
The natural-based products showed
phytotoxicity on all vegetation. Control
with all of the natural-based products was
less than 73% after the second application
and significantly less than the standard
(control) treatment of glyphosate.
(“Percent control” is the percent reduction in plant growth compared to an
untreated control plot.) The cost,
including applicator fees, for acetic acid
was $2,050/acre for two applications
compared to glyphosate at $199/acre for a
single application.
abundant forb was common catsear
(Hypochoeris radicata). The synthetic
herbicides, glyphosate (RoundUp ) and
glufosinate (Finale ) were applied once,
and the natural-based products were
applied two or three times starting May 4,
2001. Visual evaluations for weed control
were made prior to re-treatments and a
final evaluation for vegetation control was
made for both sites September 4. The
results showed:
Post-emergence treatments on
perennials
Experiments were conducted at Jug
Handle State Reserve in Mendocino.
Total vegetation control was evaluated
with pine oil, plant essential oils, acetic
acid, and citrus distillate, as well as
glyphosate and glufosinate. Gorse (Ulex
europaeus), a woody perennial that was
mowed prior to site establishment, was
the dominant vegetation at both sites
with both Himalaya blackberry (Rubus
procerus) and California blackberry (Rubus
ursinus), two other woody perennials,
velvet grass (Holcus lanatus) and sweet
vernalgrass (Anthoxanthum odoratum)
growing in the open spaces. The most
Pine oil was 88% to 90% effective for
control of common catsear.
Plant essential oils provided 80% or
greater control of all vegetation
(September 4).
Plant essential oils were the most
effective natural based treatment for
controlling velvet grass, sweet
vernalgrass and common catsear
(>86%).
Acetic acid and citrus distillate were
ineffective at controlling vegetation.
By comparison, glyphosate controlled
blackberry, the two grasses and common
catsear 94%, 100% and 100%, respectively (September 4). Glufosinate provided 84% or greater control of all species
(June 1). Including applicator fees, it was
more costly to use plant essential oils at
$2,463/acre for three applications versus
one application of glyphosate for $185/
acre.
Alternative materials for controlling roadside vegetation
Material
Acetic/ethanoic acid
Citrus distillate
Clove oil
Clove oil/acetic acid
Corn gluten meal
DRA-033
Fatty acid
Fatty acid
Fatty acid
Herbicidal soap
Pine oil
Sulfuric acid
Sulfuric acid
Herbicidal soap
Mint oil
Vinegar 20%
Trade Name
BurnOut
Hexaherb™
Matran™
BIO-WEED
(experimental)
Scythe
Greenscape
BIO-Safe
Weed-Aside™
Organic Interceptor™
CT-311
Superfast
Supplier
Tested
St. Gabriel Laboratories
Yes
Sunkist Growers, Inc.
Yes
EcoIPM, Inc.
Yes
EcoIPM, Inc.
Yes
BIOSCAPE, Inc.
Yes
EcoIPM, Inc.
Yes
Biocontrol Network
Yes
Yates NZ Limited
Yes
AGPRO NZ Limited
Yes
Gardens Alive!, Inc.
Yes
Certified Organics Limited Yes
Cheltec, Inc.
Yes
Cheltec, Inc.
Yes
Biocontrol Network
No
Idaho Mint Comm.
No
Maestro-Gro
No
Efficacy and cost-effectiveness
As of July 1, 2002, some preliminary
conclusions can be made regarding the
efficacy and cost-effectiveness of these
alternative materials as compared to
standard herbicides. In terms of efficacy,
all of the alternative materials or naturalbased products tested were phytotoxic to
the types of vegetation present at our
study sites. After the 2001 growing
season, plant essential oils (Bioganic ) was
the most effective treatment on both
annual and perennial vegetation at our
coastal test sites in Mendocino. Citrus
distillate, pine oil (Organic Interceptor™)
and acetic acid (BurnOut) in a single
application provided less than 60%
control as evaluated 14 days following
treatment. Subsequent regrowth resulted
in even less efficacy (except for the pine
oil), as evaluated 49 and 123 days
following the initial treatment, leading us
to conclude these materials provided
inadequate control. At our Hopland test
sites, control of three dominant annual
grasses after two applications of citrus
distillate, acetic acid and pine oil was less
than 70% as evaluated 35 days after the
initial treatment. At both locations, it was
inconclusive as to whether timing of
applications and rates played a significant
role in efficacy. (Studies conducted this
past spring are giving similar results as
spring 2001.) In contrast, the standard
treatment of glyphosate (Roundup )
provided greater than 90% control with
one application at all sites, except on gorse
(76%) at Mendocino, throughout the
entire season.
Though the cost to purchase natural-
based products for postemergence
treatment was less than that for standard
herbicides on dollars-per-volume or perweight of formulated product, the overall
costs for treatment were much greater.
This resulted because greater treatment
amounts were required, as were multiple
applications, which increases both the
amount of material needed but also the
amount of labor needed. A detailed cost
analysis of these natural-based products
compared to standard herbicides will be
included in the final report.
Other areas of research and
future investigations
Along with the trials whose preliminary results are described here, we are
currently also conducting additional trials
to evaluate the performance of other
alternative methods and materials:
We are comparing the performance of
natural-based products to glyphosate as
a cut stump treatment on French
broom and Jubata grass.
We are testing the application of highintensity heat (“flaming”)
We are studying the optimal timing for
mowing Yellow starthistle (Benefield et
al. 1999; Thomsen et al. 1997).
We are evaluating four newly found
natural-based products—two fatty-acid
products marketed in New Zealand,
and sulfuric acid and plant essential oils
products currently under development
in the U.S.
The results of these experiments will be
presented in the project’s final report.
There are several specific questions
that remain unanswered following the
first full year of field studies: (1) Is it
possible to obtain a complete kill after one
application of natural-based products? (2)
What is the effect of repeated applications, after several years of use, of naturalbased products on long-lived perennial
species and the soil? (3) What are the
maximum and minimum application rates
required to provide adequate control of
target weeds, and how does this vary with
timing of application? (4) How effective
would it be to combine these alternatives
with current roadside management
practices? (5) What would be the response
of Caltrans maintenance personnel to the
use of alternatives and would there be less
concern for safety because of the low
toxicity rating for most natural-based
products?
This initial project forms a foundation
for further work to answer such questions, and to develop our knowledge of
alternatives for vegetation control along
roadsides.
Contact Steve at
References
Benefield, C.B., J.M. DiTomaso, G.B. Kyser, S.B. Orloff,
K.R. Churches, D.B. Marcum and G.A. Nader. 1999.
Success of mowing to control yellow starthistle depends on
timing and plant’s branching form. California Agriculture.
Vol. 53. No. 2. pgs. 17-21.
Bingaman, B. R. and N. E. Christians. 1995. Greenhouse
screening of corn gluten meal as a natural control product
for broadleaf and grass weeds. HortScience 30:1256-1259.
Christians, N.E. 1993. The use of corn gluten meal as a
natural preemergence weed control in turf. R.N. Carrow,
N.E.Christians, R.C. Shearman (Eds.) International
Turfgrass Society Research Journal 7. Intertec Publishing
Corp., Overland Park, KS. 284-290.
Sources for alternative materials
Supplier
AGPRO NZ Limited
Biocontrol Network
BIOSCAPE, Inc.
Certified Organics Limited
Cheltec, Inc.
EcoIPM, Inc.
Gardens Alive!, Inc.
Idaho Mint Comm.
Maestro-Gro
St. Gabriel Laboratories
Sunkist Growers, Inc.
Yates NZ Limited
Location
Auckland, NZ
Brentwood, TN
Petaluma, CA
Auckland, NZ
Sarasota, FL
Franklin, TN
Lawrenceburg, IN
Meridian, ID
Hamilton, TX
Gainesville, VA
Ontario, CA
Auckland, NZ
Web site or address
www.agpro.co.nz
www.biconet.com/lawn/superfast.html
www.bioscape.com
www.certified-organics.com/interceptor.htm
www.cheltec.com
www.bioganic.com and www.ecoipm.com
www.gardensalive.com
1741 Gibson Way, Meridian, ID 83642
www.maestro-gro.com
www.milkyspore.com/burnout.htm
P.O. Box 3720, Ontario, CA 91761-0993
yates.co.nz
Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1992.
Environmental impact report on Caltrans
vegetation control programs. (JSA 89-171.)
Sacramento, CA. Prepared for California
Department of Transportation, Sacramento,
CA.
Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1997.
California roadsides: a new perspective.
January. (JSA 94-150.) Sacramento, CA.
Prepared for California Department of
Transportation, Maintenance Program,
Sacramento, CA.
McDade, M. C. and N. E. Christians. 2000.
Corn gluten meal – a natural preemergence
herbicide: Effect on vegetable seedling
survival and weed cover. Am. J. of
Alternative Agriculture. 15(4):189-191.
Thomsen, C.D., M.P. Vayssieres and W.A.
Williams. 1997. Mowing and subclover
plantings suppress yellow starthistle.
California Agriculture. 51(6):15-20
CalEPPC News
Winter 2002
7
Readings &
Resources
MAPPING BASICS
California Weed Mapping Handbook
92-page draft document. Free online at
This newly drafted handbook is a training
resource for local groups (such as Weed
Management Areas) involved in wildland
weed mapping. It provides two types of
information: (1) shared data standards, so
that different data sets will be compatible,
and (2) “how to” instructional information on mapping techniques. The aim of
this guidebook is to help those working
on weed issues to develop mapping
systems that will support project goals on
both a local and state level.
A practical report that includes action
steps and a detailed list of principles, with
examples of projects that have used these
principles. These insights and principles
are directly applicable to the Going
Native garden tour we’re planning in the
San Jose area, and worth thinking about
for any other projects. A 1-page Executive
Summary is available at ww.metrokc.gov/
hazwaste/lhwmp/behavior.html.
Tanya Kucak
Q & A FOR KIDS
invasive species as well as enforce and
implement existing laws. It offers three
examples of model state programs and
provides specific recommendations on
improvements states could make to their
existing invasive species tools. Finally, the
report compiles detailed information on
each states’ laws and regulations related to
invasive species.
Teaching Points about Invasive Plants
Natural Areas Association
Univ. of Florida, Center for Aquatic and CD ROM. $30.00. 4-page pamphlet. Free. HOW WE CHANGE DIFFERENT APPROACHES Changing Behavior: Insights and Halting the Invasion: State Tools for King County Hazardous Waste Management Program Environmental Law Institute 21-page report. Free online at 800/433-5120 or $5 Invasive Plants of California’s Wildlands .0 0 O ff ! Featuring species accounts with detailed info on plant 8 CalEPPC News Winter 2002 Invasive and Exotic Species A compendium of 93 articles from the 112-page report with CD ROM. $20.00. SIMPLY THE BEST REFERENCE GREATEST HITS 109-page report. Free online at Sacramento Weed Warriors! New and Contributing Members New members, cont’d: CalEPPC News Winter 2002 9 Species Focus Hypericum does not seem to be widely offered at locally (Bramwell & Bramwell 1974). In 10 CalEPPC News Winter 2002 Kelly, M. 2001. California Exotic Pest Plant Council. USDA, NRCS. 2001. The PLANTS Database, Update from John Wade, Pescadero H. canariense infestation on the San Mateo County coast along Highway 1. The WILDLAND California Association of Resource WEED CALENDAR… ment. Field trips visiting Hawaiian California Weed Science Society Annual Second Biennial CALFED Science Two-Day Weed School January 14-16, 2003 Sponsored by the Lake County WMA Invasive Plants and Restoration in the National Invasive Weed Awareness Week December 8-11 February 24-28 Sponsored by the Center for Invasive 4th annual gathering of weed managers to Invasive Species: A Comparison of Hawaii IPINAMS 2003 – Invasive Plants in January 6-8, 2003 November 3-7, 2003 150 years… of Carpobrotus Quotable: “ Arundo donax reproduces ONLY by ” From “The True Facts About Arundo Donax” in an open New York has giant blind albino ” Ron Sullivan, San Francisco Chronicle, 8/24/02, Home & Winter 2002 11 CalEPPC Membership Form Institutional Name $ Please mail check (to “Cal-EPPC”) and this form to: California AmeriCorps helps control Scarlet Address Home Phone Fax E-mail Non-Profit Org.
Invasive Plants
Written to help teachers and trainers
address students’ questions about native
and non-native plants. The points were
proposed by K-12 teachers. Can be used
as-is or as basis for developing your own
materials.
Applications
Invasive Species Management
This report identifies 17 tools for states to
effectively prevent, regulate, and manage
Carla C. Bossard, John M. Randall, Marc C. Hoshovsky, Editors
360 pages, 133 color photos, 76 line illustrations, 79 maps
University of California Press, 2000. Paperback.
List price: $29.95. Cal- EPPC price: $24.95 plus tax
biology and control techniques for 78 species listed as
Invasive Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern by CalEPPC.
To order, please make check to Cal-EPPC, 1442-A
Walnut Street #462, Berkeley CA 94709.
$24.95 per book, plus $1.93 per book sales tax
(for California residents), plus shipping ($5.00
first book, $2.00 each additional book).
Natural Areas Journal on invasive and
exotic species. Arranged by subject, with
complete bibliography. Order online at
ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT
INVASIVE SPECIES: Clearer Focus and
Greater Commitment Needed to
Effectively Manage the Problem
United States General Accounting Office
Report to Executive Agency Officials,
October 2002
This GAO review finds that the federal
government has made little progress in
implementing the actions called for by the
National Invasive Species Management
Plan. In addition to a call for incorporating economic data into invasive species
management budget objectives, THE
GAO recommended that the next
management plan, due in January 2003,
include performance goals that facilitate
evaluation of progress.
CHEAT SHEET
Weed Treatment Calendar
Solano County Weed Management Area
Card. Free from
Compiling information from published
articles, UC-WRIC, CalEPPC newsletters, local experience, reviews by UCCE
weed specialists, etc., this well-formatted
card tells you the best times for mechanical and chemical treatments of 11 weeds.
We aplogize if we forgot you or got your information wrong! Please let us know by emailing dwjohnson@caleppc.org
New Sustaining Member:
· Victoria Jadali (Thousand Oaks)
New Contributing Members:
· Katie Barrows (La Quinta)
· Melissa Ervin (The Nature Conservancy, Irvine)
· Mike Forbert (West Coast Wildlands, Pacifica)
· Robert Gilbert (Soquel)
· Ellen L. Simms (UC Botanical Garden, Berkeley)
· Bern Smith (Landsmiths, El Granada)
New Institutional Members:
· Redwood State and National Park (Orick)
· Mike Biscieglia (DeAngelo Brothers, Inc., Chino)
And Welcome to New Members:
Marty Acree (National Park Service, El Portal) · Earl Andress (USDA
APHIS, Brawley) · Carol Arnold (Contra Costa County RCD, Concord) · Debra Ayres (UC Davis, Davis) · Sally Barrett (Cache Creek
Conservancy, Woodland) · Debra Boelk (UC Davis, Davis) · Joshua
Boldt (EIP Associates, Sacramento) · Herb Bolton (USDA CSREES,
Washington, DC) · Shannon Brawley (Cache Creek Conservancy,
Woodland) · Ron Brown (BLM, Hollister) · Peter Buck (Sacramento
Area Flood Control Agency, Sacramento) · Daniel Burmester (Cal Dept.
of Fish & Game, Rancho Cordova) · Regina Butala (SRS Technologies,
Lompoc) · Roger Buttermore (US Fish & Wildlife Service, Stockton) ·
Noreen Cabanting (Bonterra Consulting, Costa Mesa) · Tom Cardenas
(California Surveying & Drafting Supply, Sacramento) · Cameron
Chabre (Elkhorn Slough, Watsonville) · Bernardo Chavez (BLM, Santa
Fe, NM) · Buford Crites (City of Palm Desert, Palm Desert) · Kathy
Crump (Friends of Five Mile Creek, Stockton) · Ann Dennis (CalFlora
Database, Albany) · Cov DeRamus (GGNRA, Sausalito) · Kerry
Eastman (San Joaquin River Parkway & Cons. Trust, Fresno) · Lee
Echols (GGNPA/Site Stewardship, San Francisco) · Rob Evans (Circuit
Rider Productions, Windsor) · Robin Fallscheer (Cal Dept. of Fish &
Game, Stockton) · Dennis Fox (Bakersfield) · Greg Gallaugher (University of Wisconsin, Madison, Redding) · Kevin Ghalambor (Watershed Institute/CSUMB, Seaside) · Anthony Guerriero (Watershed Institute/CSUMB, Seaside) · Claudia Gumbaro (Caltrans, Stockton) ·
Kate Handrich (BLM, Hollister) · Mark Hessing (National Training Center &
Fort Irwin, Barstow) · Brian Hildebidle (Golden Gate National Parks Association,
San Francisco) · Xiaohong Huang (Cal. Dept. of Water Resources, Bakersfield) ·
Lia Hull (Golden Gate Biosphere Reserve Association, Stanford) · Geri HulseStephens (CNPS Sanhedrin Chapter, Willits) · Marie Jasieniuk (UC Davis, Davis)
· Ryan Jones (GGNPA/Site Stewardship, San Francisco) · JoEllen Kassebaum (Natural Resources Division, Miramar Marine Base, San Diego) · Susan Kelly (Center
for Invasive Plant Management, Bozeman, MT) · Larry Klaasen (Sierra Club, San
Diego) · Janet Klein (Marin Municipal Water District, Corte Madera) · John Knapp
(Santa Catalina Island Conservancy, Avalon) · Denise Knapp (Santa Catalina Island
Conservancy, Avalon) · Sara Koenig (Lassen Volcanic National Park, Mineral) ·
Eddy Konno (Cal Dept. of Fish & Game, La Quinta) · Carla Koop (Alhambra
Watershed Action Group, El Cerrito) · Lisa Lacabanne (Aquatic Outreach Institute, Richmond) · John Lambrinos (UC Davis, Woodland) · Jaymee Marty (The
Nature Conservancy, Galt) · Jodi McGraw (UC Berkeley, Integrative Biology, Berkeley) · Miguel Mejia (BLM, Barstow) · Michael Mooney (San Francisco) · Pam
Neilson (NRCS Tulare County, Visalia) · Tony Nelson (Marin County Land Trust,
Point Reyes) · Ron Nelson (Ecovisions, Arcata) · Aaron Norwood (GGNPA/Site
Stewardship, San Francisco) · Danny Pando (BLM, Barstow) · Arnie Peterson (Lassen
Volcanic National Park, Mineral) · Carolyn Pizzo (USDA APHIS PPQ, Sacramento) · Liz Ponzini (GGNRA, Sausalito) · Sarah Ross (Sacramento Area Flood
Control Agency, Sacramento) · Maria Ryan (Univ. of Nevada, Reno, Las Vegas,
NV) · Weena Sangkatavat (Bonterra Consulting, Costa Mesa) · Stephanie Sapper
(Caltrans, Fullerton) · Aleutia Scott (National Park Service, San Francisco) · Anil
Shrestha (UC Statewide IPM Program, Parlier) · Jodie Snowbarger (Contra Costa
Co. Ag. Dept., Concord) · Scott Stewart (Conservaseed, Walnut Grove) · George
Strnad (Oakland) · Jeffrey Summers (Watershed Institute, Seaside) · Sara Sweet
(UC Davis, Davis) · Apple Szostak (Aquatic Outreach Institute, Richmond) · Carol
Thornber (UC Davis, Davis) · Luz Torres (Caltrans, Los Angeles) · Samuel Valdez
(Official Trip Reports, San Francisco) · John Wade (Pescadero Conservation Alliance, Pescadero) · Jessie Walker (AMEC Earth & Environmental, San Diego) ·
Frank Wallace (CNPS, Sacramento) · David Washburn (Washburn Grove Management, Hemet) · John Watson (Cache Creek Conservancy, Woodland) · Molly
Webster (GGNRA, Sausalito) · Shawn Witaschek (San Mateo County Parks, Redwood City) · Isa Wou (USGS , Vallejo) · Paul Yamazaki (CalTrans, Los Angeles) ·
Dana York (NPS, Death Valley) · Katy Zaremba (Invasive Spartina Project, Oakland) · David Zweifel (Big Sur Land Trust, Carmel)
canariense
Info from Mandy Tu of the Wildland
Invasive Species Team, online at
www.tncweeds.ucdavis.edu
Hypericum canariense (St. Johnswort
family) is native to the Canary Islands
where it is often located in xerophytic
scrub or forested zones, from 150 to
800m elevation. It can be very common
wholesale or specialty nurseries in North
America.
H. canariense appears to outcompete
and exclude nearly all other vegetation
once it has invaded. In coastal California
areas that have become infested, H.
canariense can comprise up to 90 to 100%
of the vegetation cover, and it
outcompetes and excludes native scrub
vegetation (J. Wade, pers. comm.). In
favorable conditions, infestations of H.
canariense can spread at a rate of up to 4590 meters per year.
H. canariense produces large amounts
of viable seed. Many seedlings have been
found just downslope of mature shrubs in
San Diego County (M. Kelly, pers.
comm.). Little information is available on
successful control methods for H.
canariense. Mike Kelly has been successful
using the cut-stump method with fullstrength glyphosate.
References:
Bramwell, D. and Z. Bramwell. 1974. Wildflowers of
the Canary Islands. Stanley Thornes, Ltd., London.
CDFA. 2001. California Department of Food and
Agriculture-Weed Management (http://pi.cdfa.ca.gov/
weedinfo/HYPERICU2.html)
North America, H. canariense occurs as
an invader in Hawaii and in California
(USDA-NRCS 2001). Previous reports
from California list this species as present
only in San Diego and Santa Barbara
counties (CalFlora 2001). In San Diego,
H. canariense has escaped cultivation as
an ornamental near the Point Loma
military cemetery (M. Kelly, pers.
comm.). In San Mateo County, H.
canariense currently covers approximately
62-99 acres near Gazos Creek. There are
several populations of H. canariense along
the county’s coast, all rapidly expanding
in range (J. Wade, pers. comm.).
H. canariense is a shrub that can grow
up to 5m tall and has simple, opposite
leaves that are oblong-lanceolate, with
tapered bases. Although the plant has
features desirable to horticulturists and is
thought to have escaped from cultivation
(CDFA 2001), it is currently not widely
grown as a garden or landscape plant. It is
kept at the Los Angeles Arboretum and
seeds are offered for sale on the internet
(Platt 2001), but on the whole the plant
Personal communication.
Platt, K. 2001. The Seed Search (www.seedsearch.
demon.co.uk/), site accessed November 2001.
Version 3.1 (http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant
Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA.
Wade, J. 2001. Pescadero Conservation Alliance.
Personal communication.
Conservation Alliance
Treatment: Ken Moore’s State Parks crew
sprayed last year with limited success. I
did some test cuttings and it resprouted.
Weed wrenching is difficult due to a
complex and deep root network, but it
might work better when the ground is
softer. TNC had success using Garlon.
Survey: I did another aerial flight this
year. Yes, it is continuing to spread.
Research: Katrina Dlugosh is researching
the plant for her doctoral thesis at UCSC.
Planning: We have a global email list of
people concerned with the problem in
Hawaii, Australia and elsewhere and are
comparing eradication technique notes. It
needs a real campaign with funding.
Local Projects: I’ve talked with the
manager at the mushroom farm in
Pescadero that has one of the biggest
infestations, and they would be cooperative with removal if someone else did it.
Contact John at
Conservation Districts: 2002 Annual
Meeting & Conference
November 14-17, 2002
Redding, CA
Using Native Grasses and Graminoids in
Restoration and Revegetation
November 20-21, 2002
San Luis Obispo, CA
Workshop sponsored by the California
Native Grass Association. Contact Jan
Bridge at
rangelands with a hands-on approach For
more information contact Bill Frost (530/
621-5509, wefrost@ucdavis.edu)
Meeting
January 19-22, 2003
Santa Barbara, CA
www.cwss.org/conf.htm
Conference: Advances in Science and
Restoration in the Bay, Delta and
Watershed
January 29-30
Konocti Harbor Resort, Lake County, CA
Sacramento Convention Center, CA
with the assistance of a grant from the
Center for Invasive Plant Management.
Speakers include Dr. Nelroy Jackson and
Dr. Joe DiTomaso. CEU’s offered. For
more information contact Tony Gallegos
(707/263-2341 or tonyg@co.lake.ca.us)
West: A Partnership Workshop
Salt Lake City, UT
Washington, DC
Plant Management and the National
Invasive Species Council.
participate in visible public activities and
to lobby their representatives.
and California
Natural and Managed Systems: Linking
Science and Management
Kailua-Kona, HI
Presented by the California-Pacific
Section of the Society for Range Manage-
Fort Lauderdale, FL
rhizomes—roots from one plant that ‘grow’ another
plant. It cannot produce by seed or any other method.
Hence, grown under the controlled conditions of a
professional agricultural operation, ouside of flood plain
areas, and with the advice and oversight of agricultural
officials, it is 100% safe.
letter to public officials from Francis J. Fitzpatrick, President
of Samoa Cane Enterprises. The firm purchased LouisianaPacific’s pulp mill on Humboldt Bay, and hopes to use the
facility to make paper from agriculturally grown Arundo.
“alligators
in the sewers (and if you don’t believe me, go ask
snopes.com). Hah. Bunch of wimps. California has
something much worse: gorse. Gorse and pampas grass,
poison hemlock and yellow starthistle, Scotch broom and
German ivy, red-apple aptenia and blue-gum eucalyptus.
Any of these is a bigger threat than a bite on the butt
from a serwergator, and not only because (unlike
sewergators) they’re all demonstrably real and threatening.
There are dozens more, and, fellow gardeners, they’re
partly our fault.
Garden section
CalEPPC News
We’re working to protect California’s wildlands from invasive plants—join us!
CalEPPC’s effectiveness comes from a strong membership, including scientists, land managers, policy makers, and concerned citizens.
Please photocopy the form below, complete, and mail with your payment. Additional donations are always welcome to support our
projects; we are a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, and donations beyond basic membership rates are tax deductible.
Individual
Student/low income
$15
Regular
$30
Family
$40
Contributing
$50
Sustaining
$100
Life
$1,000
Additional donations for:
Cape ivy bioconrols research
International Broom Initiative
Educational outreach and materials
Cal-EPPC News and operating costs
Regular
$100
Contributing
$250
Patron
$500
Sustaining
$1,000
Affiliation
$
$
$
Cal-EPPC Membership
1442-A Walnut Street #462
Berkeley CA 94709
Exotic Pest Plant
Council
1442-A Walnut Street, #462
Berkeley, CA 94709
ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED
Wisteria (Sesbania punicea) on the
American River in Sacramento
City, State & Zip
Work Phone
U.S. Postage
PAID
Berkeley, CA
Permit No. 1435