CalEPPC
News
A quarterly
publication
of the California
Exotic Pest Plant Council
Volume 6 Number 3
Summer 1998
IN THIS ISSUE
Presidents Message
by Mike Pitcairn ……………….. p. 3
The Distribution of Salsola
soda in San Francisco Bay
by Judi Tamasit ………………. p. 4
Starr Ranch Sanctuary
Artichoke Conference
by Mike Kelly ………………….
p. 6
Extension Toxicology
Network (ExToxNet) as a
Source of Pesticide
Toxicology Information
by Joe DiTomaso ……………. p. 8
Locations and degree of presence of Salsola soda throughout San Francisco Bay.
Map designed by A. N. Cohen, 1989.
CalEPPC News
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:
j provide a focus for issues and
concerns regarding exotic pest
plants in California;
j facilitate communication and the
exchange of information regarding
all aspects of exotic pest plant
control and management;
j provide a forum where all interested
parties may participate in meetings
and share in the benefits from the
information generated by this
council;
j promote public understanding
regarding exotic pest plants and
their control;
j serve as an advisory council regarding funding, research, management
and control of exotic pest plants;
j facilitate action campaigns to
monitor and control exotic pest
plants in California; and
j review incipient and potential pest
plant management problems and
activities and provide relevant
information to interested parties.
Officers
President
Vice-president
Secretary
Treasurer
Past-president
1998 CalEPPC Officers and
Board Members
Mike Pitcairn
Greg Archbald
John Randall
Sally Davis
Ann Howald
At-large Board Members
email:
email:
email:
email:
email:
Joe Balciunas*
email:
Cameron Barrows* email:
Carl Bell*
email:
Joe DiTomaso*
email:
Steve Harris*
email:
Jo Kitz
email:
Anne Knox
email:
Brenda Ouwerkerk email:
Ellie Wagner
email:
Peter Warner
email:
<102062.170@compuserve.com>
* Board Members whose terms expire December 31, 1998
Working Group Chairpersons
Arundo
Nelroy Jackson
Artichoke thistle Mike Kelly
Brooms
Karen Haubensak
Cape ivy
Greg Archbald
Cortaderial
Joe DiTomaso
Euphorbia terracinaJo Kitz
Fennel
Jennifer Erskin
Lepidium
Joel Trumbo
Saltcedar
Bill Neill
Spartina
Steve Jones
Veldtrass
Dave Chipping
Volunteers
Pete Halloran
Yellow starthistle Mike Pitcairn
Editor
Sally Davis
909.279.7787
619.566.6489
nejack@monsanto.com
mkellysd@aol.com
415.561.3034, x3425
530.754.8715
818.346.9675
530.753.8193
916.358.2952
281.287.5246
greg_archbald@ggnpa.org
ditomaso@vegmail.ucdavis.edu
mtnsrt@aol.com
jaerskine@ucdavis.edu
805.528.0362
dchippin@calpoly.com
916.262.2049
mpitcairn@cdfa.ca.gov
32912 Calle del Tesoro, San Juan Capistrano, CA
92675 ph: 949.487.5427 email: sallydavis@aol.com
CalEPPCs web site: http://www.caleppc.org
Submission Dates for CalEPPC News
If you would like to submit a news item, an article, a meeting announcement, or job
opportunity for publication in the CalEPPC News, they must be received by the deadlines
listed below. Editor reserves the right to edit all submissions. Send your text/disk/email
to editors address above.
Submission Dates:
Spring
April 15
Summer
July 15
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 a qualified donee for tax deducible
charitable contributions.
Page 2 Summer 1998
Fall
Winter
October 15
January 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 efficacy, safety, or legality.
CalEPPC News
Presidents Message
by Mike Pitcairn
S
everal interesting discussions
have occurred during the last few
CalEPPC board meetings concerning the topics to be presented at
CalEPPCs Symposium 98 which
will be held in Ontario, October 2-4,
1998. The discussions centered
around what information would best
serve our membership. I will try to
summarize some of our conclusions,
but first some background.
Some (not all) exotic plants are
aggressive invaders that escape
areas in which they were originally
intended and invade native plant
communities. Upon invasion, these
exotic plants displace native flora
and disrupt ecosystem function.
They can change nutrient cycling
and moisture regimes. They can
change the frequency of fire or even
introduce fire into areas it has not
historically existed (e.g. the occurrence of exotic annuals in the
Mojave Desert). The threat of these
exotic species is so great that they
need to be removed, eradicated, or
at least controlled lest we lose the
diversity of our native plant communities and the integrity of native
ecosystems.
When CalEPPC was organized
in the early 1990s, knowledge of
the threat and damage caused by
some exotic plant species was
confined to a few experts, and
methods for controlling these plants
was sorely lacking. Since its inception, the goals of CalEPPC have
been primarily educational and
twofold: to get the word out about
the threat of some exotic plants to
native plant communities, and to
provide information on how to
eradicate or control them. For this,
we have produced a plant list identifying the most invasive exotics; we
have a newsletter providing information on plant biology and control
activities; and we put on an annual
symposium where experts in plant
biology and control methods present
the most current information on
these topics. Scientific studies and
reports on the damage caused by
The goals of
CalEPPC have been
primarily educational
and twofold: to get
the word out and to
provide information…
some exotic plants are being published annually and this information
is passed on to you as it becomes
available. Control methodology
encompasses several different
technologies: releasing living organisms with biological control; using
controlled burns; coordinating crews
who remove plants with chain saws
and hand tools; and applying chemical herbicides. Information on
control methodology is limited, but
growing.
Control methodology is a very
large and diverse topic and the
CalEPPC board has discussed at
length what information would best
serve our members. Several views
on many diverse aspects of plant
control have been expressed in these
discussions. Still, a consensus appears to occur on several points
which I will do my best to summarize:
1) Control of an exotic pest
plant must be considered in the
larger context of the habitat and
ecosystem where the control activity
will take place. The goal of controlling exotic plants is not just removal
of the target weed but also restora-
tion of native plant community. No
progress is made if one plant is
removed and another invasive exotic
takes its place. Thus, exotic weed
control must be incorporated in a
weed management strategy that
encourages the return of native
species and prevents the reinvasion
of exotics.
2) Safety is critical for all control
methods. Some control methods risk
damage to other plant species,
others risk damage to the applicators. Chain saws should be used with
appropriate protective gear and
proper training. Herbicides are
should be applied with appropriate
equipment and protective clothing,
etc. Organization and identification
of duties are critical to reduce risk to
volunteers in field crews.
3) The control methods used
must be science-based and shown to
be effective. There are so many
weeds and so little time. Lets make
the most of our efforts. This is not
to say that experimenting with new
methods or unique combinations of
traditional methods should not be
utilized, for they should. We do ask,
however, that the methods used and
results achieved be documented so
that effectiveness can be evaluated.
4) While not all control methods
are appropriate for all weeds and all
situations, the choice of control
method cannot be made before the
habitat is examined and a control
strategy is developed (see 1 above).
CalEPPC will provide as much
information as possible for all
control methods. The final decision
rests upon those responsible for the
project.
The theme for Symposium 98
is Working Smarter, Working
Together. This should be a very
interesting and enlightening symposium. I hope to see all of you there. j
Summer 1998 Page 3
CalEPPC News
The Distribution of the Non-Native
Plant Salsola soda in San Francisco
Bay: Summary of a Thesis
by Judi Tamasi
I
determined the distribution of a
non-native plant, Salsola soda,
throughout marshes in San Francisco Bay for my senior Environmental Sciences honors thesis at the
University of California at Berkeley.
Although some sightings of the plant
in the Bay had been officially reported before my project, my paper
is the first attempt to synthesize the
data pertaining to past documentation with the data I collected regarding the locations where the plant is
presently found. An analysis of my
findings suggests that S. soda has
the potential to alter native wetland
ecosystems in San Francisco Bay.
Salsola soda is in the family
Chenopodiaceae and is related to
the well-known agricultural weed,
Russian thistle (Salsola tragus). S.
soda is a halophyte, found on
mudflats and open areas of salt
marshes. It is succulent, generally
glabrous, and ranges in color from
green to red to brown. S. soda is
native to South Europe and its
presence was first documented in
San Francisco Bay in 1968 (Thomas, 1975).
From field visits primarily, as
well as telephone interviews and
library and herbaria searches during
the 1994-1995 academic year, I
concluded that S. soda is widely
present throughout the geographical
extremes of the Bay, excluding
Suisun Bay (see map). This includes
the north coast of San Pablo Bay at
Tubbs Island, along the east shore at
locations such as Berkeley Marina
and Chevron Marsh, along the west
shore at sites such as the bike path
north of Sausalito and Coyote Point
Page 4 Summer 1998
County Recreation Area, and at
the south end of San Francisco
Bay at the Palo Alto Yacht Harbor.
I did not find it at several locations
I visited in the less salty waters of
Suisun Bay, although two people
did report finding it there (Preston,
1995, pers. comm.; Witham,
1995, pers. comm.).
A description of the environment in which S. soda is found can
provide clues to how it arrived as
well as clues to characteristics of
the environment which favor its
persistence. Several times I found
S. soda at mouths of pipes, along
riprap or along sloughs, suggesting
that the plant may expand its
distribution by means of water. The
seeds or propagules can float and
travel in water before they are
deposited onshore and have the
opportunity to establish elsewhere.
In addition, I found the plant along
roads and bike paths, indicating
that tires play a role in dispersing
the seeds. The seeds can be caught
up in tires, travel some distance,
then fall out at another location.
Although I found S. soda along
edges of water bodies, I also found
it many times along levees, particularly in dry soil. In all cases, the
presence of surrounding tidal
marsh vegetation implied that the
soil is saline. The results of a soil
test I conducted confirmed this
concept.
Some of my observations
suggest that S. soda may have the
potential to affect the integrity of
our wetlands in San Francisco Bay.
An outstanding example of its
potential to establish and spread is
found at the crossing of Pinole Creek,
the railroad tracks, and the adjacent
wetland. At this location, S. soda was
the dominant plant in large densities
covering a large area along a dry
levee. Here, S. soda may have altered
the vegetative structure of the ecosystem, and perhaps influenced this
ecosystem in other unknown ways. At
several other sites, I observed S. soda
in small densities over a large area or
in a large density over a relatively
small area. In addition, I noted the
presence of the plant at locations
where it was documented over twenty
years ago, which is evidence of its
ability to persist in an area.
The results of my telephone
interviews were not entirely conclusive, yet they do suggest the possibility
that S. soda may threaten San Francisco Bay marshes. On one hand,
many of the people I interviewed, who
have experience with San Francisco
marshes, had not heard of the plant
or did not think it posed any great
problems. However, two people I
interviewed thought S. soda had been
problematic lately (Olson, 1995, pers.
comm.) or that it shows promise to be
a problem (Hartesveldt, 1995, pers.
comm.). I discussed untested suppositions regarding some possible impacts
caused by S. soda with some people.
These suppositions include Salsola:
establishing in previously
unvegetated areas, subsequently
affecting the short-legged shorebirds
by decreasing their visibility from
predators (Baye, 1994, pers. comm.),
replacing the native pickleweed
and therefore transforming the landscape (Olson, 1995, pers. comm.), or
Continued page 9…
CalEPPC News
Book Review: Assessment and
Management of Plant Invasions
Editors: J.O. Luken and J.W. Thieret, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997,
Reviewed by Carl E. Bell
T
his book is the latest of the
Springer series on environmental management. It has some excellent information on the subject of
invasive plants and should be a
welcome addition to most libraries, if
you can afford it. The book has 18
contributed papers, divided among
four sections, covering a range of
topics from the ecology of nonnative plants and invasion, to case
studies of successful management
efforts. The first section on Human
Perceptions includes three of the 18
papers. These papers, including one
by our own John Randall, concern
the ecology of invasive species and
what impact they have on natural
systems. Two of these papers (not
the one written by John) ask us to
carefully define what is indigenous
and non-indigenous and justify
control measures. The concepts
behind these papers are probably
not likely to get a lot of sympathy
from the majority of us, but they are
designed to make you think. Johns
contribution, by the way, is a good
general review of the process of
defining weeds in natural areas.
The second section, Assessment
of Ecological Interactions, consisting
of seven papers, is devoted to basic
principles of plant ecology as it
relates to invasive species. As such,
they are good reading as a review of
ecology or a primer for those that
need an education in ecology. The
third section is a more practically
oriented group of four papers on
Methods and Philosophy of Managing Exotics. The final section is
Regulation and Advocacy, with four
papers on organizing people and
efforts against exotics.
I found this book well written by
a host of experts in this field. My
only problem with this book is that I
feel it is too diverse. Topics range
from ecology, setting up EPPCs,
how to define a species as nonindigenous (let alone as invasive),
and dealing with politicians to start a
control program. I felt there was a
lack of focus in the book as it tried
to be all things to all people. That,
combined with the hefty price tag,
will not make this book attractive to
too many people although it has an
abundance of good information. j
Congratulations to the Recipients of
California BLMs War on Weeds Mini-grant!
E
ight proposals were received and four were funded for a total of $15,000. The proposals were all reviewed and
ranked by signatory representatives of the Noxious Weed MOU that attended the last meeting of the California
Interagency Noxious Weed Coordinating Committee. The recipients were:
California Native Plant Society
East Sierra Weed Management Area
Lassen County SWAT Team
Battle Creek Watershed Conservancy
Special weed issue of Fremontia
ID handbook, tamarisk video
Weed prevention flyer
Regional weed video
$8,100
$5,000
$1,400
$500
All of the recipients will be using the WOW grant award for educational activities, which was the primary focus for
this year. Based upon comments by the participating agencies, Weed Management Areas (WMAs) will be the primary
focus for next year (given Congressional funding). As part of a Weed Management Area, your agency or organization
will be eligible for more funding opportunities than as an individual. Another source of funding for Weed Management
Areas is the Fish and Wildlife Foundations Pulling Together noxious weed initiative. This large funding source is
available every fall, so start working on your WMA proposal now!
Contact Anne Knox (aknox@ca.blm.gov) to find out more about Weed Management Areas, the Pulling Together
grant initiative, and how you can get involved. j
Summer 1998 Page 5
CalEPPC News
Starr Ranch Sanctuary Artichoke
Conference
by Mike Kelly
T
he Biology and Control of
Artichoke Thistle was the
theme of a conference held June 12
at the Audubon Societys Starr
Ranch Sanctuary. Sanctuary managers Sandy and Pete DeSimone
organized the fruitful meeting.
Participants could not have asked for
a more beautiful setting than the
4,000 acre nature preserve, home
to a wide diversity of habitats and
species. The reason for the conference was highly visible in the grasslands, both native and exotic annual,
where a heavy artichoke infestation
is often seen to dominate the cover
in many places.
Artichoke thistle (Cynara
cardunculus) was once one of
Californias worst pest plants
(Thomsen 1986), infesting hundreds
of thousands of acres, especially in
Southern California. Today it is still
a major pest plant on rangeland and
in open-space parklands and preserved lands, including Mission
Trails Regional Park, Black Mountain Open Space Park, Gooden
Ranch, Crystal Cove State Park,
Starr Ranch Sanctuary, The Irvine
Ranch and others. It is still common
to see grasslands along Interstate 5
on the south coast infested with the
weed. Vacant lots are commonly
filled with it in places like Rancho
Bernardo. (Much of the artichoke
problem was solved in the longstanding Southern California tradition of building a subdivision on top
of it.)
Twelve speakers presented talks
at the conference, roughly divided
into three categories: basic biology
and ecology, case histories of
control efforts, and restoration of
once infested lands. Tony Bomkamp
of Glenn Lukos Associates described
Page 6 Summer 1998
a mitigation project his company
carried out involving artichoke
eradication. Bomkamp argued that
choosing artichoke infested sites for
mitigation projects only makes sense
if they are adjacent to good quality
native habitat where there are the
propagules necessary for the restoration of native plants.
Peter Bowler underscored this
point with a provocatively titled talk,
Artichoke as an Ecological Resource and its Utility as a Precursor to Restoration. Bowler is well
known for his work in salvaging
coastal sage scrub species and using
them in restorations (Bowler 1997a,
1997b, 1994, 1992). Bowler
describe a project site where artichoke thistle was first successfully
removed using the chemical herbicide glyphosate (Roundup®), then
restored to native habitat with
transplanted coastal sage species.
Bowler made two important points:
first, why remove the artichoke
thistle if native replacements arent
already on site or ready to be
brought in? In sites where large
monocultures of artichoke are to be
found, limiting oneself to simple
eradication of the artichoke often
opens the site to other weeds. Some
of these other weeds are true strategy weeds and would be worse than
the artichoke. He suggested choosing sites adjacent to existing native
vegetation and working from there.
He argued that the artichoke thistle
actually creates good conditions for
restoration in areas where it has
formed monocultures and been
established for long periods of time.
In these sites, he has often found the
ground beneath the artichoke to be
have halos of relatively exotic seedfree soil. Additionally, dead arti-
choke plants act as a conduit to
bring water deeper into the soil
horizon, good for the native plants
and seeds being planted.
Dawn Lawson and Lee Ann
Naue of the Southwest Division
Naval Facility Engineering Command and Marine Corps Base Camp
Pendleton described the successful
15-year effort to control artichoke
thistle on Camp Pendleton. They
used the herbicide Dicamba
(Banvel®) and found it to be effective.
Dave Pryor from the California
Department of Parks and Recreation
at Crystal Cove State Park detailed
Murder is
creating a vacancy
without nominating
a successor.
Ambrose Pierce
effective control efforts in the park.
He noted that a change in administration had resulted in a lack of
follow-up for a period, during which
the artichoke thistle enjoyed a
resurgence He emphasized the need
for consistent control year after year.
Roundup® was the herbicide of
choice for the park. Trisha Smith
discussed The Nature Conservancys
partnership with the Irvine Company
on the Irvine Preserve where hundreds of acres of artichoke control
are involved.
Mike Kelly, president of the
Friends of Los Peñasquitos Canyon
Preserve in San Diego described a
successful control effort in that
preserve and shared new informaContinued next page…
CalEPPC News
tion on the existence of a biocontrol
agent for the artichoke thistle.
Scientific presentations revealed
some interesting information. Ted
St. John, a well-known expert on
mycorrhizae from Tree of Life
Nursery in San Juan Capistrano
spoke of preliminary work indicating
that artichoke thistle is at least
facultatively mycorrhizal, meaning
that promoting mycorrhizae, an
effective technique with some
ruderal weeds, would probably not
be effective with this plant.
Amanda Boose and Ginger
White from UC Riverside reported
early results from research they are
doing on behalf of Starr Ranch
Sanctuary. They have been investigating the basic physiology and
phenology of the weed, using
research plots at the university.
Germination experiments confirmed
observations made by Pepper
(1996) on the breadth and discontinuous germination of artichoke
seed. The seed can germinate under
a wide variety of conditions and over
a prolonged period of time. Experiments revealed a startling fact, that
the plant is setting up a tap root
right after the cotyledon stage and
before the rosette stage. Cut it and it
resprouts even at this early stage.
Cutting the plant at the 6th leaf and
11th leaf stage failed to kill it. In
each case the plant resprouted.
Cutting at the rosette stage delayed
bolting, but didnt kill the plant. The
plants resprouted and still bolted,
albeit a bit later. Experimenting on
the underground tuberous parts of
the plant revealed that even a tiny
portion of the root system left in the
ground can resprout into a plant.
This shouldnt be too surprising
since its close cousin, the commercial artichoke (Cynara scolymus), is
propagated in this manner, through
root division. Participants are
eagerly awaiting the publication of
these and other experiments.
Finally, Sandy DeSimone
described an ambitious research into
the possibility of mechanical control
of the artichoke through mowing.
Starr Ranch is experimenting with
different mowing strategies in an
effort to determine if it is possible to
starve the roots. The three-year
experiment hopes to answer the
question of whether an effective
alternative to the use of herbicide
exists for the control of Cynara
cardunculus. DeSimone will be
reporting on this work at next
Octobers CalEPPC Symposium in
Ontario.
A big thanks to the DeSimones
for hosting and organizing this
stimulating and informative meeting.
at the Starr Ranch Sanctuary. j
References:
Bowler, P.A. 1997a. New Directions in Coastal Sage Scrub Restoration: Establishing Local Species
Richness, Ethics and Effort in Onsite
Seed Collection, GIS Applications
and a New Approach to Long-term
Project Design and Performance
Standards, in P.A. and E. Read
(eds.). Coastal Sage Scrub Restoration: Proceedings of the Coastal
Sage Scrub Restoration Symposium
held at the Fifth Annual Conference
of the Society for Ecological Restoration, California Chapter. (in press).
Bowler, P.A., A. Wolf, H.V. Pham,
M.A. Archer, A.S. Bak, M. Bedaux,
A. Chun, J.S. Crain, S. Feeney, A.
Gloskowski, P. Golcher, C.J.
Hodson, M.L. James, R.C. Johnson,
M.S. Milane, V.H. Nguyen, R.S.
Salazar, and C.R. Simonds, 1994.
Transplanting Coastal Sage Scrub
Seedlings from Natural Stands
(California). Restoration and Management Notes 12(1): 87-88.
Bowler, P.A. 1992. Biodiversity
Conservation in Europe and North
America. II. Shrublands In Defense
of Disturbed Land. Restoration and
Management Notes 10(2): 144-149.
Pepper, A. and M. Kelly. 1996.
Controlling Cynara cardunculus
(artichoke thistle, cardoon, etc.) In
J.E. Lovich, J. Randall, and M.D.
Kelly (eds.).Proceedings of the Calif.
Exotic Pest Plant Council Symposium Vol. 2: 1996. pp. 97-101.
Thomsen, C.D., G.D. Barbe, W.A.
Williams and M.R. George (1986).
Escaped artichokes are troublesome
pests. California Agriculture 40:7-9.
Plan to attend
CalEPPC Symposium 98
M
ark your calendars to reserve
the weekend of October 2-4,
1998 for CalEPPC Symposium 98,
Working Smarter, Working
Together, at the Hilton in Ontario,
California. Full day and short-day
field trips will tour local restoration
sites. The invitations for CalEPPC
Symposium 98 were mailed in
August. The symposium has been
awarded 2 hours of educational
credits for laws and regs and 7
hours of approved credits for in the
other category by DPR.
Posters addressing all areas of
exotic pest plant control in wildland
ecosystems of California will be
displayed in the symposium break
area. You and your colleagues are
invited to display your poster regarding research, control methods, tools,
or other related topics. Informal
presentations by poster authors are
invited but not required. Please call
Barbara Leitner at (510) 253-8300,
email: leitner@jong.com. j
Summer 1998 Page 7
CalEPPC News
Extension Toxicology Network
(ExToxNet) as an Excellent Source of
Pesticide Toxicology Information
by Joseph M. DiTomaso, University of California, Davis
M
any claims are made concern
ing the hazard or safety of
herbicides in the environment.
Unfortunately, the bulk of this
information is primarily accessible to
the general public through newspaper articles which are often inaccurate, or literature provided by groups
with specific agendas. It is often
difficult to find truly unbiased information on the effect of pesticides on
animal health, water quality, food
safety, and other environmental
issues. I have spent numerous hours
tracking down medical papers cited
in newspaper articles or other
materials only to find that the
conclusions were misinterpreted by
journalists. Of equal importance,
background information on pesticide
toxicology and risk assessment are
difficult to find. In most cases,
toxicological manuscripts are so
complex, it is nearly impossible for
an untrained reader to understand
the information.
Is there an unbiased, accessible,
and understandable source of information on pesticide toxicology?
Where does one go to learn about
the potential for pesticides to act as
endocrine disrupters or carcinogens,
or to understand the toxicity of inert
ingredients in herbicide formulations? Fortunately, most of these
questions can be answered on one
web site I recently discovered while
browsing the Internet. It is called
ExToxNet, which is an acronym for
Extension Toxicology Network. This
is a collaborative effort among
environmental toxicologists from the
University of California, Davis;
Oregon State University; Michigan
Page 8 Summer 1998
State University; Cornell University;
and the University of Idaho. It is
located at the URL address:
The major objective of
ExToxNet is to provide clear, science-based summaries of the most
recent literature on pesticide toxicology. This information is presented in
the form of Toxicological Issues of
Concern (TICs), toxicology fact
sheets, Pesticide Information
Profiles (PIPs), and Toxicology
Information Briefs (TIBs). Controversial issues are discussed and both
sides of a particular view are considered. In addition to providing an
electronic form of information on
pesticide toxicological issues, the
goals of ExToxNet are also to stimulate dialog on toxicology issues and
respond to requests for information.
Although pesticide toxicology is
a major component of the web site,
many other issues are also covered,
including the use of chlorine in
water, multiple chemical sensitivity
among some individuals, E. coli
outbreaks, domoic acid, Bacillus
thuringiensis, diet and cancer,
household hazardous waste, indoor
air quality, and many other important topics. For most of us concerned with potential herbicide
hazards in wildland environments,
the site also focuses on how pesticides affect people and the environment. Within this section, toxicologists address questions on pesticide
exposure, environmental fate, inert
ingredients, gardening and pesticides, endocrine disrupters, and
pesticides in drinking water. Each
section provides a general overview,
as well as specific information on
various herbicides. For example,
under the topic of pesticide exposure, there is a discussion on how
exposure occurs, the routes of
pesticide penetration, precautions
which should be taken to limit
exposure, properties of pesticides
important to persistence and mobility, effects of exposure on health
risk, and protection of pets to
pesticide exposure. As a further
convenience, most topics contain
links to additional information on
other sites. Similar detail is provided
for issues concerning environmental
fate of herbicides, including movement in air, soil and water, and
aspects related to pesticide breakdown and fate in the environment,
and in areas where pesticides are
applied indoors.
Recently, I spent some time
searching through the library to find
information on endocrine disrupters,
particularly with respect to herbicides. After being thoroughly frustrated, I contacted the ExToxNet
site. In addition to presenting an
excellent discussion of the endocrine
system (including a diagram), the site
also provides several pages of
information on chemicals that cause
endocrine disruption, both natural
and synthetic, and the relationship
these compounds have to cancer. It
also summarizes the evidence
implicating environmental contaminants as endocrine disrupters in
humans and wildlife.
Perhaps the most important
aspect of ExToxNet is the detailed
toxicological information available
Continued next column…
CalEPPC News
ExToxNet (Contd)
Salsola (contd)
when conducting a search for a
specific herbicide. Each mention of a
selected herbicide is listed and can
be readily displayed. In addition, a
list of published citations can also be
obtained for any herbicide. For
example, a search of triclopyr
(Garlon 3A, 4 and pathfinder II)
yielded 378 published citations on
various aspects of its toxicology.
Many of these references are EPA
publications describing the original
studies used in the registration
process. The site also contains a
Pesticide Information Profile (PIP)
of each herbicide registered for use
in the United States. Within these
profiles are included the registration
status, a short description of the
herbicide use, and a more detailed
discussion of the toxicological and
ecological effects, and environmental
fate of the compound. Under the
category toxicological effects there
is a short summarization of acute
and chronic toxicology, reproductive
effects, teratogenic, mutagenic, and
carcinogenic effects, organ toxicity,
and the fate of the compound in
animals and humans. Ecological
effects consider the toxicity of each
compound to birds, aquatic organisms, and other pertinent species
(i.e., bees). The section on environmental fate covers herbicide breakdown in soil, groundwater, surface
water, and in plants. There is also a
list of physical properties for the
active ingredients and exposure
guidelines, such as the Maximum
Contamination Level (MCL).
In summary, I find the ExToxNet
web site to be the most easily accessible and comprehensive source of
information on pesticide toxicology
currently available. I encourage
CalEPPC members to utilize this site
to obtain information specific to their
situation or find answers to toxicology
questions of concern to themselves,
their peers, or the general public with
which they interact. j
occupying an unfilled niche,
thus causing little harm or influence
to the ecosystem and its components (Baye, 1994, pers. comm.).
My study determined the
distribution of S. soda in San
Francisco Bay and described the
environment in which it is found.
Because S. soda is widespread in
the Bay and it appears to display
the potential to impact the ecosystem, I advise that further studies be
conducted on the possible impacts
of this plant. Also, land managers
should note the presence of S. soda
and monitor the spread of the plant
over time. I recommend that this
research be conducted before
official eradication measures are
taken.
Note: If anyone would like to
comment on this summary or
receive a copy of the seventeen
page report, please contact the
author, Judi Tamasi, 5819 Lawton
Avenue, Oakland, CA 94618.
References:
Baye, Peter, Plant Ecologist, Army
Corps of Engineers, San Francisco,
CA, 1994, personal communication.
Cohen, A. N., Ph.D candidate,
Energy and Resources group,
University of California, Berkeley,
CA. 1994. Personal communication.
Hartesveldt, Dave, Biological
Consultant, Coarsegold, CA, 1995,
personal communication.
Hickman, J.C., ed., 1993, The
Jepson Manual:Higher Plants of
California, Berkeley, CA, University of California Press, 1400 pp.
Olson, Brad, Botanist, WESCO,
Novato, CA, 1995, personal communication.
Preston, Robert, Botanist, LSA
Associates, Richmond, CA, 1995,
personal communication.
Continued next column…
Thomas, J.H., 1975, Salsola soda
L. (Chenopodiaceae) in Central
California, Madroño, v. 23, no. 2, p.
95.
Witham, Carol, Biological Consultant, Davis, CA, 1995, personal
communication. j
More on Fort Ords
November War on
Weeds Symposium
T
he goal of the War on Weeds
program on former Fort Ords
28,000 acres are to identify the
greatest threat noxious weed species, prevent their further spread,
and to eventually achieve total
eradication. At the second annual
War on Weeds Symposium to be
held in November, weed eradication
specialists, conservation association
members, biologists, volunteers, and
cooperating agencies at Fort Ord will
share each others successes and
failures in combating weeds, as well
as discuss methods to develop
regional collaborative teams to
attack the problem.
A field trip is planned to enable
participants to view Fort Ords
cooperative weed eradication
projects and the rare habitats that
are to be preserved.
Plan to attend in November
1998. Call Bruce Delgado for more
information at 408.394.8314. j
ERRATA
In the Spring 1998 edition of
CalEPPC News, Vol. 6 No. 2, the
botanical name of Cape ivy (formerly
known as German ivy) was misspelled. The correct spelling is:
Delairea odorata. j
Summer 1998 Page 9
CalEPPC News
Effects of Arundo donax on Water Resources
by Mark E. Iverson, P.E., City of Riverside, Water Reclamation Plant
E
very year, giant cane (Arundo
donax) evaporates an estimated
56,200 acre-feet of water along the
Santa Ana River; enough water to
serve a population of about 280,000
people. If this amount of untreated
water was purchased from the Metropolitan Water District (MWD), it
would cost approximately
$18,000,000 at the current cost for
untreated drinking water. There is,
therefore, a cost that can be easily
associated with Arundo and its effects
on water resources. A successful
Arundo removal program could
ultimately cut the evapotranspiration
by two-thirds. This would save an
estimated 37,500 acre-feet per year
of water worth approximately
$12,000,000.
It is easy to attach a dollar
amount to how Arundo affects the
quantity of water resources, but it is
difficult to do so for how it affects the
quality of water resources. Being a
giant grass, Arundo provides little
shade along the river. This causes the
water temperatures to increase,
which in turn changes the water
chemistry of the river. The net result
is water quality that is less suited for
fish and other aquatic life. Arundo,
therefore, affects the water resources
of the Santa Ana River in ways that
are both tangible and intangible to
man.
Effects on the Quantity of Water
Resources
Arundo is a non-native plant that
was imported to Southern California
from the Mediterranean by the early
Spanish settlers. Over the years the
Arundo population has increased to
the point where it out-competes all
other native plant species in riparian
habitats. And it uses about three
times as much water as they do.
There are no specific studies on the
evapotranspiration rate of Arundo.
Page 10 Summer 1998
Horticulture experts estimate
Arundo evaporates water at approximately the same rate as rice. In
short, every acre of Arundo consumes about 5.62 acre-feet of water
per year. Native species use only
about two-thirds this amount; 1.87
acre-feet per year. The water lost to
evapotranspiration is water that
would otherwise be available for
groundwater recharge and ultimately drinking water supplies.
The Santa Ana River and other
streams and rivers in Southern
California are natural groundwater
recharge basins. Were it not for the
numerous wastewater discharges
along the Santa Ana River, it would
be almost, if not completely, dry
except during the short rainy
season. Only a small portion of the
runoff from the heavy winter rains
reaches the groundwater aquifers;
most of it runs off quickly and is
ultimately discharged to the ocean.
But nearly all of the water that flows
in the river during the dry season
either percolates into the groundwater aquifer or is lost to evaporation.
There are an estimated 10,000
acres of Arundo along the Santa
Ana River. Using the estimated
evapotranspiration rate of 5.62
acre-feet per year, a total of 56,200
acre-feet per year of water is being
consumed by the Arundo. If the
Arundo was completely replaced
with native vegetation, the annual
water consumption of the plants
would be only about 18,700 acrefeet per year. To put this in perspective of beneficial use, one acre-foot
of water is enough to serve a family
of five for one year. The savings in
water consumption would therefore
be enough to serve a population of
around 190,000 people. The water
saved by reducing evapotranspiration will naturally recharge the
groundwater aquifers and be avail-
able for drinking water supplies.
Effects on the Quality of Water
Resources
Native vegetation normally
overhangs the river, providing shade
that keeps the temperature of the
banks and the water down. Being a
giant reed grass, Arundo provides
little shade along the banks of the
river; consequently the water in the
river is exposed to more sunlight.
This increases the water temperature
and changes the chemistry of the
water.
With increased sunlight comes
increased photosynthesis activity.
Warmer water, in conjunction with
more sunlight, promotes algae
growth which tends to raise the pH
of the water. The increase in algae
growth also reduces the clarity of the
water. The Santa Ana River, being a
wastewater-effluent dominated
stream, is high in ammonia nitrogen
concentration. The high pH of the
water shifts the equilibrium of
ammonia from the ionized to the unionized form. Un-ionized ammonia is
more toxic to fish and other aquatic
life.
People benefit either directly or
indirectly from a healthy river habitat. Those people who fish, swim
and otherwise visit the river for
recreation benefit directly from
better water quality. But even those
who dont visit are affected. How,
and to what monetary extent, is
difficult to determine. Suffice it to
say that ultimately we are all affected
by our natural environment and
water resources are a key factor in
environmental quality. Removal of
the Arundo is therefore important
from the standpoint of both the
quality and quantity of water resources. j
CalEPPC News
CalEPPC New Members
CalEPPC would like to welcome the following individual and institutional
members who have joined CalEPPC in the months from June 1998 through
August 1998:
Debra Ayres
Cameron Barrows
Michael Bostwick
Alicia Doran
Suzanne Ebright
Joshua Fodor
Josephine Guardino
Evelyn Healy
Cheryl Ingersoll
Brewer International
Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States, U.S. Congress,
Office of Technology Assessment, OTA-f-565, September 1993, is now
available on the Web. It is the most complete treatement on the issue of
invasive species. The URL is:
Cape ivy Collections
I
n conjunction with the South
Africa field surveys of Cape ivy
(Delairea odorata), Dave Headrick,
Cal Poly Crop Science, San Luis
Obispo is examining samples of
Cape ivy for existing insect infestation. Daves graduate students are
conducting monthly studies in the
San Luis Obispo area and would
appreciate one-kilo samples from
various locations along the coast of
California ranging from Fort Bragg
to the Mexican border. Adequate
collections have already been made
from San Francisco, San Bruno
Mountain, southern Marin County
and San Luis Obispo County.
Please send your one-kilo
sample in a tightly-closed plastic bag,
detailing habitat location, aspect, and
date of collection to: Dave Headrick,
Crop Science Department, Cal Poly
State University, San Luis Obispo,
CA 93407
Avoid shipments arriving on
Friday; plan to have shipments arrive
earlier in the week. Call Dave
Headrick to let him know when a
shipment is due to arrive by calling
805.756.5382 or email:
Letters to the
Editor
I
n the last CalEPPC News (Vol. 6
No. 2), Mike Forbert published a
very nice paper on the control of
Cape ivy. However, there are a few
items which should be clarified to
prevent improper use of herbicides.
First, it was noted that 18%
Roundup concentration and BrushB-Gon could be used to control
Cape ivy. These are homeowner
recommendations that would never
be used by professional applications.
This was implied but not directly
stated. Professional applicators
would use Roundup Pro, with a
higher concentration than 18%, or
triclopyr formulated as Garlon 3A or
4. Most importantly, tank mixing
any Roundup formulation with a
fertilizer is off-label. Glyphosate,
the active ingredient of Roundup,
may precipitate out in a salt solution, particularly when high concentrations of calcium or magnesium
are present. This is typical in many
fertilizer formulations. Applying
fertilizers in a separate treatment is
a better option.
Joe DiTomaso
Helen Johnson
Eveline Leon Martin
Craig Martz
Steve Schoenig
Adrian Wolf
WEB SITE NOTICE
Vegetation Maps
Online Checklist
A
Checklist of Online Vegetation
and Plant Distribution Maps has
been compiled by Claire Englander
(University Herbarium, University of
California, Berkeley) and Phil Hoehn
(Branner Earth Sciences Library and
Map Collections, Stanford University) and is available at:
The list is arranged by area
(world or continent, then subdivided
by region or country name, and
when necessary subdivided by
smaller areas). The map (or atlas)
titles are hotlinked. All titles
showing vegetation distribution (e.g.,
forested areas, vegetation types,
maps of individual family, genus or
species distribution) were included.
The compilers quickly learned that
few maps are easily found via
Internet search engines using the
term maps. Rather, they are
pages within a website, and
oftentimes a page within a chapter
of an electronic paper.
The compilers hope users will
find the checklist useful, and news of
additional sites or about any URLs
no longer working. Phil Hoehn,
Map Bibliographer Branner Earth
Sciences Library & Map Collections,
Stanford University, Stanford, CA
94305-2210 email:
phoehn@sulmail.stanford.edu j
Summer 1998 Page 11
1999 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 key to success.
Additional contributions by present members are welcomed!
q Status
Individual
Institutional
Name
q Retired/Student*
$15.00
N/A
Affiliation
q Regular
$25.00
$100.00
Address
q Contributing
$50.00
$250.00
q Sustaining
$250.00
$1000.00
q Lifetime
$1000.00
N/A
Please make your check payable to CalEPPC and
mail with this application form to:
City/State/Zip
Office Phone
Home Phone
Fax
email
CalEPPC Membership
c/o
Sally Davis
32912 Calle del Tesoro
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675-4427
* Students, please include current registration and/or class schedule
Calendar of Events
September 22-26
5th Annual Conference of the Wildlife Society, Buffalo, NY. Contact: 301.896.9770;
email:
September 27 – 30
7th Workshop on Oak Physiology & Growth Problems in Oak Plantings, South lake
Tahoe, CA. Sponsored by the Integrated Hardwood Range Management Program. Contact:
Joni Rippee, 510.643.5429; fax 510.643.5438; email:
September 28 – 30
1998 Society for Ecological Restoration International Conference, Austin, TX.
Contact; 608.262.9547; email:
October 1 – Jan 15
Watershed Management: A Distributed Learning Course Over the Internet.
Sponsored by the Institute for Resources 7 Environment & Continuing Studies, University of
British Columbia, Canada. Contact Professor H. Schreier: email:
Web sites:
October 2 -4
Working Together, Working Smarter: CalEPPC Symposium 98, Ontario, CA.
Sponsored by the California Exotic Pest Plant Council. Contact: Sally Davis, 949.487.5427;
email:
CALIFORNIA
EXOTIC
PEST PLANT
COUNCIL
31872 Joshua Drive, #25D
Trabuco Canyon, CA 92679-3112
ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED
NON-PROFIT ORG.
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
TRABUCO CANYON, CA
PERMIT NO. 7