CalEPPC
News
A quarterly
publication
of the California
Exotic Pest Plant Council
Volume 9 • Number 2
Spring 2001
U.S. Geological Survey
& CalEPPC CoSponsor
Workshop on Ecology
and Management of
Invasive Plants in the
Deserts of
Southwestern North
America
CalEPPC 10th Annual
Symposium in San
Diego
Achievements & Challenges in Wildland
Weed Management
CalEPPC Election
Ballot. Please vote &
mail in.
Also In This Issue
Poster for U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s invasives’ outreach campaign, featuring John
Walsh of American’s Most Wanted TV fame. Walsh is also featured in Leif Joslyn’s new
video Yellow Starthistle: Managing an Invasive Alien Species. See p. for a review of this
new educational video.
Initial Broom Initiative
Sierra Club Tamarisk Bash
Viable Seed Production
by Cape Ivy
More on Italian Thistle
Yellow Star Thistle Video
Educational Materials
Membership form
3
6
13
14
15
15
16
CalEPPC News
Page 2
Who We Are
CalEPPC NEWS is published quarterly
by the California Exotic Pest Plant
Council, a non-profit organization. The
objects of the organization are to:
• provide a focus for issues and
concerns regarding exotic pest plants
in California;
• facilitate communication and the
exchange of information regarding all
aspects of exotic pest plant control
and management;
• provide a forum where all interested
parties may participate in meetings
and share in the benefits from the
information generated by this
council;
• promote public understanding
regarding exotic pest plants and their
control;
• serve as an advisory council
regarding funding, research,
management and control of exotic
pest plants;
Spring 2001
2000 CalEPPC Officers & Board Members
Officers
President
Vice-president
Secretary
Treasurer
Past-president
Mike Kelly
Joe DiTomaso
Mona Robison
Sally Davis
Mike Pitcairn
mkellysd@aol.com
jmditomaso@ucdavis.edu
rarobison@ucdavis.edu
sallydavis@aol.com
mpitcairn@cdfa.ca.gov
At-large Board Members
Joe Balciunas*
Carl Bell**
Matt Brooks*
Carla Bossard*
Paul Caron**
Tom Dudley*
Jack Massera**
Steve Schoenig*
Becky Waegel**
Bill Winans**
joebalci@pw.usda.gov
cebell@ucdavis.edu
matt_brooks@usgs.gov
bossard3@pacbell.net
PAUL_CARON@DOT.CA.GOV
tududley@socrates.berkeley.edu
jmassera@worldnet.att.net
sschoenig@cdfa.ca.gov
bwaegell@cosumnes.org
BWinanAG@co.san-diego.ca.us
* Term expires Dec. 31, 2001 / **Ters expires Dec. 31, 2002
Working Group Chairpersons
Artichoke thistle
Mike Kelly
858-566-6489 mkellysd@aol.com
Arundo
Tom Dudley
510-643-3021 tdudley@socrates.berkeley.ede
Brooms
Karen Haubensak 510-643-5430 katenah@socrates.berkeley.edu
• facilitate action campaigns to monitor
and control exotic pest plants in
California; and
Cape ivy
Mona Robison
916-451-9820 raroison@ucdavis.edu
Cortaderia spp.
Joe DiTomaso
530-754-8715 jmditomaso@ucdavis.edu
Fennel
Jennifer Erskin
530-752-1092 jaerskine@ucdavis.edu
• review incipient and potential pest
plant management problems and
activities and provide relevant
information to interested parties.
Lepidium
Joel Trumbo
916-358-2952 jtrumbo@dfg.ca.gov
Saharan mustard Jim Dice
760-767-3074 jdice@statepark.org
Saltcedar
Bill Neill
714-779-2099 bgneill@earthlink.net
Spartina spp.
Debra Ayres
530-752-6852 drayres@ucdavis.edu
Veldt grass
Dave Chipping
805-528-0914 dchippin@rubens.artisan.calpoly
.edu
Volunteers
Maria Alvarez
415-331-0732
Yellow starthistle
Mike Pitcairn
916-262-2049 mpitcairn@cdfa.ca.gov
CalEPPC web site:
www.caleppc.org
CalEPPC News Editor: Mike Kelly (see above for address)
Submission Dates for CalEPPC News
Please Note:
The California Exotic Pest Plant
Council is a California 501(c)3
non-profit, public benefit
corporation organized to provide a
focus for issues and concerns
regarding exotic pest plants in
California, and is recognized under
federal and state tax laws as a
qualified donee for tax deductible
charitable contribution.
If you’d like to submit a news item, article, meeting announcement, or
job opportunity for publicaton in the CalEPPC News, it must be
received by the deadlines listed below. Editor reserves the right to edit
all submissions. Send your text/disk/email to edtior’s address above.
Submission Dates:
Spring . . . May 15
Summer. . . July 15
Fall. . . October 15
The articles contained herein were contributed to the CalEPPC
newsletter. These articles represent the opinions of the authors
and do not necessarily reflect the views of CalEPPC. Although
herbicide recommendations may have been reviewed in
contributed articles, CalEPPC does not guarantee their accuracy
with regard to efficiency, safety, or legality.
CalEPPC News
Page 3
Spring 2001
International Broom Initiative
A Comprehensive Broom and
Gorse Biological Control Effort
The Problem
The Culprits
French broom, Scotch broom,
Spanish broom, Portuguese broom,
and gorse are all leguminous
shrubs native to central and southern Europe that are impacting millions of acres in California and
western North America. Infested
forest lands result in higher regeneration costs, increased risk of wildfire, and reductions in sight safety
distance along access roads. Infested pastures and meadows result in
reduced forage for livestock and
wildlife due to the high levels of
quinolizidine alkaloids in their
leaves and stems. Dense stands of
these leguminous shrubs prevent
establishment of native and desirable plant species, especially after
fires where their ability to fix nitrogen allows these exotic weeds to
out compete and exclude native
chaparral species.
The seed bank in the soil commonly ranges from 30,000 to 100,000
seeds per square meter and seeds remain viable for many years. Brooms
present an increased fire hazard and
thus are a serious threat to homes.
Millions of dollars are spent annually in control costs against these invasive exotic weeds. These exotic legumes occur from British Columbia
to southern California, generally occurring at elevations less than 3,500
ft (1,000 m). In California, infested
areas occur in the Sierra Nevada
foothills and the western side of the
Coast Range. Over the last decade,
they have extended their range and
increased in density in established
areas. Scotch broom is estimated to
infest over 1 million acres in California alone; in Oregon, it now occurs
in 20 counties. This same trend has
been observed for the other brooms
and gorse.
The genera to which these exotic brooms and gorse belong are
closely related and weakly differentiated. Consequently, many species
have been moved back and forth
between genera several times. The
current taxonomic designations are
as follows:
Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius L.)
Link CalEPPC: A-1, State list:
noxious weed
Portuguese broom (Cytisus striatus
Hill) Rothm. CalEPPC: A-2,
French broom (Genista monspessulana L.) L. Johnson CalEPPC: A-1,
State list: noxious weed
Spanish broom (Spartium junceum
L.) CalEPPC: B
Gorse (Ulex europaea L.) CalEPPC:
A-1, State list: noxious weed
All are shrubs to 3 meters tall
with green stems and yellow pealike flowers. They were originally
introduced as landscape ornamen-
French broom (Genista
monspessulana) Illus. from Invasive
Plants of California’s Wildlands (2000
tals, for erosion control, and natural
barriers. Brooms have escaped cultivation and have aggressively invaded many natural areas. French
broom and gorse are evergreen; the
other brooms are deciduous. Unlike
the brooms, gorse has long spines
along its stems. All colonize open
disturbed areas, such as logged or
burned sites, roadsides, and pastures, and can invade undisturbed
grasslands, coastal scrub, oak
woodlands, and open forests. They
do not tolerate heavy shade but can
tolerate minimal shade along the
edges of forest canopies. Most are
drought-resistant.
Limitations of Current Control
Methods
Established infestations are difficult to eliminate because large,
long-lived seedbanks accumulate
under the canopy. Removing plants
by hand pulling, with machinery,
or herbicide applications is very expensive. Prescribed burns can eliminate above ground growth, but do
not prevent resprouting from the
crown and may stimulate a flush of
seed germination. Herbicides are
not permitted in some areas heavily
infested with brooms. Also, Scotch
and French brooms can grow in
physically challenging environments such as streamside thickets,
willows, and poison oak. Given this
sobering picture, and the high biological stakes, we need every feasible treatment method under the Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
approach available to combat these
species.
Development of safe and effective biological control programs
against these invasive weeds has
become an urgent priority. SuccessContinued on next page
CalEPPC News
ful biological control may give land
managers an extremely costeffective tool for controlling brooms
and gorse with the added benefit of
minimizing the use of herbicides in
the environment. Biological control
offers the best chance, within a
framework of integrated pest management, to protect forest and riparian habitats from extensive degradation due to these invasive weeds.
Biological control has already
been successful in controlling several exotic weeds in California, including Klamath weed, tansy ragwort, and puncturevine. The exotic
brooms and gorse are not considered a problem in their native
range, and one of the explanations
for this is the number of insects and
diseases that attack them in their
native habitats. These insects and
diseases reduce plant size and density and some may be suitable for
use as biological control agents.
Why attack these brooms
as a group?
Any natural enemy considered
for introduction as a biological control agent must undergo a series of
host specificity tests to ensure their
safety; that is, that they do not attack any of our agricultural crop
plants, ornamental plants, or our
native plants. Typically, this testing
takes at least 2 years to complete.
Because these exotic brooms and
gorse are closely related, the same
group of test plants, both economic
and native species, can be used to
test any potential biological control
agents. Of the native plants, lupines
are the most closely related group
and thus, the most susceptible to be
attacked by natural enemies of
these brooms and gorse. By growing all of the test plants in mass, the
host specificity testing will be performed more efficiently and at lower cost.
A second reason to develop a
program against the exotic legumes
as a group is to prevent re-invasion
by another noxious species follow-
Page 4
Spring 2001
species and gorse. Current funding
and in-kind contributions total
$166,800 (Table 1). Recent discussions with CSIRO’s lead scientist
for brooms, Dr. Andrew Sheppard
from Australia’s “Cooperative Research Centre for Weeds” (Weeds
CRC), indicate that expansion of the
Scotch broom research effort could
be achieved by bringing the current
part-time staff up to full time and
adding a post-doctorate position to
oversee the host specificity testing
at the CSIRO biological control laboratory in southern France.
In addition to work performed
overseas, there is important work to
be done in California. This additional work includes field studies to
determine the current distribution,
phenology, and reproduction of
brooms and gorse in the western
United States, their current utilization by endemic and introduced insects, collection of seed of native
plants for anticipated host specificity testing, and training on the damage and biology of the new biologi-
ing successful control efforts. If one
broom species is controlled, but
other broom species fills the void,
little will have been accomplished.
Instead, all of the brooms need to
be controlled together. In that way,
one weed problem is not exchange
for another.
Action Needed
Currently, there is an international cooperative research project
among Australia’s Commonwealth
Scientific and Industrial Research
Organization (CSIRO), New Zealand’s Landcare Research Ltd., and
the Oregon Department of Agriculture to develop biological controls
for Scotch broom. This cooperative
project provides an excellent opportunity to expand efforts to other
noxious legume species. Much of
the basic biology and natural enemy attack in the native habitats of
Europe and North Africa have been
worked out for Scotch broom. It
would be expedient to build upon
this knowledge and include research efforts for the other broom
Table 1. Budget for current and expanded biological control research
for noxious legumes by Australia, New Zealand, and the US International
Broom Initiative.
Project Costs
Salaries
Principal Research Scientist
(Dr. Andrew Sheppard)
Salary, overhead, and travel
Current
Proposed
108,500
108,500
Post Doctorate Position
Salary, overhead, and travel
0
76,200
Senior Technical Officer
Technical Officer
Casual labor
23,800 (50%)
8,700 (20%)
0
47,700 (100%)
43,600 (100%)
10,000
Operating
Laboratory and Greenhouse space
Travel
24,300
18,000
54,300
38,000
Total
183,300
378,300
Difference between current and proposed = $195,000 per year.
CalEPPC News
Page 5
cal control agents to facilitate their
release and establishment in the
western United States. While an exact dollar amount cannot be assigned to this work, a conservative
estimate of the value would be at
least $50,000 per year.
a natural enemy shows high specificity to its target host and is considered safe for introduction, a petition
for release summarizing the host
specificity data will be submitted for
approval by USDA-APHIS. Upon
approval, the natural enemy will be
collected by CSIRO staff and
shipped to the USDA-ARS quarantine facility in Albany, California, for
clean-up, inspection for parasites or
diseases, and confirmation of species identification. When released
from quarantine, the natural enemies will be released at identified
field nursery sites for establishment.
Proposed Work Plan
Our goal is to find $245,000
(195,000 + 50,000) to $265,000 (to account for inflation) per year for a
ten year period for biological control of French broom, Scotch broom,
Spanish broom, Portuguese broom,
and gorse. Under this proposal, scientists with CSIRO and CABI Bioscience, two of the world’s premier
organizations for research in biological control of weeds, would carry
out the work at CSIRO’s research
facility at Montpellier, France. Over
the next four years, CSIRO staff
would conduct continent-wide survey of targeted broom and gorse
populations focusing on native habitats in southern France, northern
Spain, Turkey, and North Africa
where most of these species are
found. Dr. Andrew Sheppard will
continue to lead the foreign exploration effort. With funding from the
Australian Weeds CRC, Dr. Sheppard has already found many
promising natural enemies of
Scotch broom and French broom.
He will begin exploration for natural enemies of Spanish and Portuguese brooms. His experience with
the natural enemies of Scotch and
French brooms will facilitate the
natural enemy exploration for these
two new broom targets and will
greatly increase chances of success.
The surveys, while focusing primarily on arthropods, would also include identification and assessment
of possible pathogens. Through
these intensive surveys it is estimated that most or all of the natural enemies of the five noxious legumes
would be identified in four years.
At the CSIRO facilities in Montpellier, France, potted broom and
gorse plants will be grown under
Spring 2001
Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius)
Pictures from Invasive Plants of California’s Wildlands (2000 UC Press)
glasshouse conditions and used to
rear collected insects through adult
life stages including oviposition
(egg laying). This is essential to
identify and curate the collected insects, a substantial portion of which
are expected to be unknown to science or not previously identified to
species. Species identification and
biology, including library research,
would be a key part of this effort.
Once a complete list of insects
and pathogens is produced for a target species, a provisional prioritized
list of biological control agents will
be produced. These natural enemies
will undergo host specificity testing
at the CSIRO facility in Montpellier,
France. There is great advantage to
performing host specificity tests
where native plant species closely
related to the brooms and gorse can
be inspected in the field and tested
under non-quarantine conditions in
the laboratory. If the candidate insects listed above do not oviposit or
develop on closely related plant species, they will be considered suitable
for further specificity testing, evaluation, and possible release in the
United States. At this time, nontarget host plants native to California will be tested in quarantine using no-choice feeding and oviposition tests to evaluate possible risk. If
Request for Support
The International Broom Initiative could potentially provide one
biological control agent per year
once the first few years of prospection and agent selection have been
completed, at a cost between
$195,000 and $240,000 per year.
This represents only a fraction of
the cost already being spent to control brooms and gorse in California.
A single depository would simplify
the cooperative agreement and
transfer of funds to CSIRO. The California Exotic Pest Plant Council
(CalEPPC) has agreed to serve as a
depository and accept donations
from all interested parties and set
up the necessary agreements with
CSIRO. CalEPPC is a California notfor-profit organization and has the
ability to receive grants and enter
into contract agreements with other
public agencies. Donations from individuals and private organizations
would be entirely tax deductible.
Prospective contributors are requested to consider this proposal
and work plan and become a partner in the International Broom Initiative by making a donation to
CalEPPC for all or part of the balance needed to fund completely the
first year of the project.
For Further Information
For any general inquiry regardContinued on next page
CalEPPC News
Page 6
Spring 2001
Special Offer Continued — $5 Off
Invasive Plants of California’s Wildlands
edited by: Carla C. Bossard, John M. Randall, & Marc C. Hoshovsky
360 pp., 7 x 10, 133 color photos, 76 line illust., 79 maps / Published by UC Press
Paperback. ISBN 0-520-22547-3 / Common name index shipped with book
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – Order Form (Please print) – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – Send order form to: KW Publications, POB 26455, San Diego CA 92196. Or call 858-566-6489 or Fax
858-271-1425 or email mkellysd@aol.com. Profits from each book sold go to CalEPPC. MC / Visa excepted
Qty.
_____ Invasive Plants of California’s Wildlands at $24.95 each ($29.95 less $5 off = $24.95).
_____ Sales tax for California residents: $1.87 for each book.
_____ Shipping and handling, $5.00 for first book, $2.00 each additional book.
_____ $ Total for order, including sales tax and shipping
Name ___________________________________ Org. ____________________________ P.O. _____________
Street _________________________________ City ____________________ State _____ Zip _______________
Phone _______________________ Email _______________________
Visa, MasterCard. Card #: _______________________________________ Exp. date (month/year): ___/___
Name as it appears on card (if different from above): ______________________________
(Broom Initiative cont’d)
ing the International Broom Initiative or the proposal described here,
please contact:
Bill Baxter or Walt Decker
California Dept. of Forestry
and Fire Protection
802 N. Main Street
Fort Bragg, CA 95437
(707) 964-5674
bill_baxter@fire.ca.gov
walt_decker@fire.ca.gov
For details regarding CSIRO and
the biological control research,
please contact:
Dr. Michael Pitcairn
California Department of Food
and Agriculture
Biological Control Program
3288 Meadowview Road
Sacramento, CA 95832
(916) 262-2049 Office,
Fax (916) 262-2059
mpitcairn@cdfa.ca.gov
Sierra Club Tamarisk Bashing
Mike Kelly
Larry Klassen just can’t help
himself. Before arriving for a recent
San Diego County Weed Management Area meeting near Lake
Hodges, this Sierra Club leader just
had to go down to the lake and
warm up for the meeting by bashing a few saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima). And, after the meeing, a rather large tamarisk outside the
meeting hall seemed to be calling to
him and soon it went down!
For four years now Larry has
been organizing Sierra Club volunteers to go out to Anza-Borrego State
Park in the desert to kill tamarisk in
sensitive sites, especially Jacumba
Jim Canyon, home to the Federally
endangered Big-horn sheep, a species quite dependent on the often
ephermeral water sources in the
desert. Jacumba Jim Canyon, which
has one of the few year round creeks
in this section of the desert.
Larry has seen first hand just
how much water infestations of this
exotic shrub use up. In an article in
the Hi-Sierran newsletter of the San
Diego Sierra Club (Sept. 2000), Larry reported:
“Last year we had a group of
Sierra Club volunteers, the CCC
[California Conservation Corps]
and BLM [Burea of Land Management] rangers. We cut some large
trees and about 50 yards of smalol
tamarisk bushes. The next morning
when we went back into the canyon, we could see more water less
than 16 hours later.”
Despite taking some heat for using herbicide to treat the tamarisk,
Larry continues to organize his
bashes.
CalEPPC News
Page 7
Spring 2001
Cautionary Note for Land Mangers & Stewards
Viable Seed Production by Cape Ivy
in California Finally Confirmed
Joe Balciunas
Tests of the seeds produced by Cape ivy (Delairea
odorata) in California have generally shown that they
are not viable – they generally will not germinate and
produce a seedling. For instance, Carla Bossard [see Invasive Plants of California Wildlands] reports that none of
the thousands of seeds, from 26 California populations,
examined by her and her students, were viable. Young,
Balciunas, and Clements [Proceedings, 2000 CalEPPC
Symposium] likewise report that although Cape ivy
seeds from South Africa and Hawaii germinated readily, those from California failed to germinate.
Nevertheless, new Cape ivy populations keep appearing at locations where it seems highly implausible
that they generated from fragments of Cape ivy. Thus
many weed warriors, e.g. Jake Sigg [Fremontia Oct.
1993] have insisted that Cape ivy in California must at
least occasionally produce viable seed.
To help resolve this question, during last year’s CalEPPC Symposium in
Concord, I offered a
one hundred dollar reward to the first person who could provide me with viable
Cape ivy seeds from
California. I recently
paid this reward to
Matthew Simone of
Mill Valley. In February, Matthew was one
of the volunteers at Ft.
Cronkite, who was inspecting a recently
cleared infestation of
Cape ivy in the Marin
Headlands for resprouts and overlooked plants. He noticed some tiny Cape
ivy plants that appeared to be seedlings. He brought these to the attention of National
Park Service Cape ivy team leader, Ellen Hamingson.
She was aware of my reward offer, and phoned me
about Matthew’s discovery. A few days later, on February 15th, I met Ellen at Ft. Cronkite, and, accompanied
by Mona Robison, inspected some of the seedlings,
both in pots and at the field site. By this time, the
plants were several inches high, and had a half dozen
true leaves. It was, therefore, difficult at that time to
confirm that these small plants had grown from seeds,
rather than plant fragments.
However, less than 50 yards from the site, we
found some Cape ivy that had just finished flowering.
We collected some of the most promising heads – with
the receptacles mostly brown and senescent, but still
closed and clasping the white“powder puffs” of pappus, the silky hairs to which the seeds, if any, would be
attached. Back at my laboratory in Albany, my assistant Eve Lednicky, split the heads from this sample. As
usual, the heads contained mostly shriveled seeds, but
this time, there was an occasional large, plump seed.
We planted several dozen of these promising, plump
seeds in commercial potting mix. Within two weeks 11
seedlings had sprouted. The photo below shows one of
these seedlings after
about month. It has
put out its first true
leaves, but beneath
these, the dicotyledon
leaves are still apparent. It unquestionably
sprouted from a seed.
Mona Robison is
currently in the process of testing the viability of Cape ivy seeds
collected from dozens
of different sites in California and Oregon.
Until her results are
known, it would be
best that those persons
who are trying to control Cape ivy, complete
their control efforts before Cape ivy finishes
flowering. This will reduce the chance of reinfestation from seed. In California, the flowering period of Cape ivy varies from site to
site, and from season to season. However, the first
flowers can appear as early as October, the peak flowering is usually in December and January, and the lst
flowers linger into March.
CalEPPC News
Page 8
Spring 2001
More about Italian Thistle
Jack Massera, Massera Farms
My family has several ranches
in northern Monterey County, and I
can remember hoeing and shoveling Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus) in the 1950’. So Italian thistle as been around for a while, at
least in Monterey County. In the
50s milk thistle (Silybum marianum)
was the worst weed, and Italian
was around, and we cut it when we
had the time and energy. It didn’t
seem to be too bad in those days.
We moved to a new ranch in
1975 and it had no Italian thistle.
Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus) Pictures from Invasive Plants of
California’s Wildlands (2000 UC Press)
Within a few years, however we
had thistle and again not too much
and we didn’t treat it as too big a
deal. At the new ranch however the
thistle numbers exploded and got
worse and worse. Today it is all
along the roadsides and in all the
neighboring properties. I spend a
lot of time trying to control it. In
the 1980s I noticed Italian thistle
growing on Fort Ord. Since then it
has increased considerably, not
only on Fort Ord but on neighboring properties as well. I read in the
CalEPPC News (Winter 2001) that
Bruce Cowan is saying that it is ex-
panding down the coast towards
Big Sur.
My take on Italian thistle is that
in the early infestation stages it is
not much of a problem. It hangs
around and nobody spends too
much effort on its control. At some
point one begins to think, hey, this
weed is getting out of hand. Perhaps it is already too late, especially
if it is also growing in the neighbors
fields, on roadsides, etc. My recommendation is that this is a bad weed
and when you first see it kill it.
Don’t let it get away.
I start controlling Italian thistle
around the first of March, when the
thistle rosettes are big enough to
see. I use Garlon or Remedy which
are both broad leaf weed killers
and spray using a 2 gallon hand
sprayer which I carry around the
field looking for the thistle.
I hate to use roundup early as it
will also kill the grass. I prefer not
to hoe or dig them out early in the
spring because it also kills the grass
and if you don’t get all of the thistle
root it will grow back. If the grass
has dried out and the thistles are
still relatively green, I will change
to Roundup. Garlon and Remedy
don’t do well on thistles once they
begin to bloom. I won’t kill the
grass with Roundup if the grass has
already died and reseeded.
Sometimes I take a shovel out to
control the Italian Thistle. Usually
the ground is too hard for a hoe,
and if you use a Polaski the handle
is too short and you will get “bit”
by the thistle. Just hit the thistle
stem right above the ground with
the shovel and you will cut off the
stem. It will be too late for the thistle to grow back this late in the
spring. If there are a lot of thistles, I
use the shovel like a sythe. I believe
the Fort Ord Weed Warriors use
machetes on the thistles. If there are
a really lot of thistles and it is too
late to spray you can use a weed
eater or a tractor mower. We have
sheep, and they will eat some thistle heads in the spring, and a lot of
the plant after it dries up, but not
nearly enough to control the plant.
I have been seeing more and more
of a seed eating weevil on the thistle. Maybe they will help.
I agree with Bruce Cowan on
his two main principles of weed
control.
1. Eliminate the seed source.
2.. Be more persistent than the
weeds.
Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus) Pictures from Invasive Plants of
California’s Wildlands (2000 UC Press)
North American Weed
Management Assoc.
Conference & Trade
Show
Aug. 14 – 16, 2001
Wyndham Colorado
Springs Hotel
Colorado Springs,
Colorado
Adena Greene
gunweed@rmi.net
CalEPPC News
Page 9
Review: Educational Materials
Yellow Starthistle Video
Mike Kelly, president
Yellow Starthistle: Managing an
Invasive Alien Species is the latest in
a series of videos on invasive weeds
brought out by Leif Joslyn’s Xenobiota Xposures. It’s an excellent educational tool for wildland managers, voluteer land stewards and the
lay public.
In Part I, the 50 minute video introduces the general subject of invasives and how they change the landscape, then details the historical
introduction of Yellow Starthistle
(Centaurea solstitialis). Another section tells how to identify the plant
and reviews its basic life cycle.
John Walsh, best known for
tracking down “Amrica’s Most
Wanted” fugitives has joined
the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
to ask your help in a new fight:
against “America’s Least
Wanted” — invasive plants and
animals that are threatening our
waterways, our crops, and even
our public safety.
— U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Part II reviews all the known
control methods, including manual
control, mowing and grazing; the
biological control agents already in
the field, prescribed burning, and
chemical control. Other techniques
such as competitive reseeding and
restoring, including a special section on using native grasses, are explored.
Joslyn also discusses the relatively new Weed Management Areas in the State of California and the
role they are playing in combating
this weed.
In a somewhat confusing transition, Part II ends with credits, but
then invites you to continue on
with a Part III. The videographer
was undoubtedly wrestling with
the fact that Parts I and II tell a
tight, coherent story in the roughly
30 minutes “experts” say is the public’s attention span for educational
videos, and the fact that Part III
takes up some miscellaneous Yellow Starthistle (YST) issues and examples. I thought the transition
could have been done more
smoothly. Part III looks at YST and
water, YST Mapping Projects,
Adaptive Land Management and
more. This is a minor quibble with
an otherwise excellent video. Another such quibble is not to have
used the John Walsh portion more
prominently (see this newsletter’s
cover). Perhaps Joslyn was a bit
commercially conservative and uneasy about using such a mass market approach to this subject. In any
case, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife’s
“America’s Least Wanted” poster
with John Walsh is just the sort of
device we need to use to reach the
broader public.
Land stewards can use this to
get up to speed to contront the
new explosion of YST in
Southern California.
Spring 2001
Other
Educational
Materials
Videos
Available from Xenobiota Exposures (see Yellow Starthistle Video
story):
Pampas Grass; Managing an Invasive Alien Species, 1999, 23 minutes, $23 including tax and
shipping.
Invasion of the Tamarisk, 11 minutes, 1997, $15 including tax and
shipping
Invasive species fact sheets
online (Nationwide)
From: Jil Swearingen
(Jil_Swearingen@nps.gov)
The Plant Conservation Alliance
weeds web site has forty-four fact
sheets on different weeds. The most
recent additions are:
English ivy (Hedera helix)
Porcelainberry (Ampelopsis brevipedunculata)
Cogon grass (Imperata cylindrica)
Tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima)
Oriental bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus)
The video is available for $23 including sales tax and shipping from
Xenobiota Xposures,
62 Stratford Rd.,
Kensington, CA 94707.
Phone 510.524.3031.
Email: leif@xenob.com.
I highly recommend that any
group or individual confronting
this highly invasive weed obtain
this video and use it aggressively in
your educational efforts.
Exotic bush honeysuckles (Lonicera
maackii, morrowii, tatarica, etc.)
P.S. Be sure to obtain copies of the
John Walsh poster from your local
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Office.
http://www.nps.gov/plants/
alien/index.htm
Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula)
Lesser celandine (Ranunculus ficaria)
Salt cedar (Tamarix ramosissima &
others)
Giant cane (Arundo donax)
If you want to see these (or the other 34), point your web browser
to:
2001 CalEPPC Membership Form
If you would like to join CalEPPC, please remit your calendar dues using the form provided below. All members
will receive the CalEPPC newsletter, be eligible to join CalEPPC working groups, be invited to the annual
symposium and participate in selecting future board members. Your personal involvement and financial support
are the keys to success. Additional contributions by present members are welcomed!
Individual
Institutional
❑ Low Income* $15
❑ Regular
30
❑ Family
40
❑ Contributing 50
❑ Sustaining 100
❑ Lifetime
1000
N/A
❑ Regular
❑ Contributing
❑ Patron
❑ Sustaining
___________________________________________________
$100
250
500
1000
* Includes students
Please make an additional contribution in my name to:
Name
___________________________________________________
Affiliation
____________________________________________________________________
Address
____________________________________________________________________
City/ State/ Zip
Student/Low Income membership
$_____
___________________________________________________
Cape Ivy Biocontrol Fund
$_____
Office Phone
Please make your check payable to CalEPPC and mail
with this application form to:
CalEPPC Membership
c/o Sally Davis
32912 Calle del Tesoro
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675-4227
Home Phone
___________________________________________________
Fax
*Students, please include current registration and/or class schedule
NON-PROFIT ORG.
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
MISSION VIEJO, CA
PERMIT NO. 1117
32912 Calle del Tesoro
San Juan Capistrano CA 92675-4227
ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED
Recycled paper