When it comes to the light brown apple moth (LBAM), if two are found in the same area – as happened in Sonoma in April – a state and federal quarantine results. What happens when two becomes four? It all depends on location.
Sonoma’s original 15-square-mile quarantine is due to be lifted by October, with no introduction of the controversial pheromone twist ties – if no new moths appear within the area. Recently, however, two more LBAMs have been found, in close proximity, but – because one was found in Sonoma and the other in Napa, and both far from the original two – three things apply: the current quarantine remains unchanged; a new federal quarantine is avoided; and the controversial pheromone twist ties are still off the table.
According to representative Steve Lyle, the third Sonoma LBAM find, confirmed Aug. 13, was right on the border of Napa County, about 7.5 miles southeast of the currently quarantined area. The other find, confirmed July 23, was less than 1.5 miles due east in Napa County. Lyle explained that if they had both been found in the same county, a federal, countywide quarantine would have resulted. Instead, the areas will fall under limited, local quarantine, with stepped up vigilance.
Stefan Parnay, district manager of the Sonoma Agricultural Commission, said the new quarantine, announced Aug. 29, consists of 19 square miles straddling Sonoma and Napa counties in the Carneros region. The quarantine applies to all properties, residential and public. In a heightened program of vigilance, 100 moth traps per square mile have been set in the “core” area and 25 per-square mile in the surrounding area. According to the CDFA announcement, “People who are unsure if they are within the quarantine zone are asked to assume that they are.”
Pheromone twist ties on hold – for now
“The main impact is that there will be conditions [attached to] moving fruit off property,” said Greg Clark, assistant agricultural commissioner for Napa County. “Growers, transport haulers and wineries will enter into compliance agreements and will continue to process fruit.” Additional traps are already being applied in both counties.
Plans for pheromone twist ties in Sonoma are currently tabled, but controversy over their use is not.
On Aug. 15, the Sonoma County Democratic Party called upon the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors and the CDFA “to inform residents … of the absence of long-term human health impact testing of the
biopesticide twist ties, the presence of undisclosed ingredients in the twist ties, and the possibility that the biopesticide dispensed by these twist ties may persist in their bodies for an unknown period of time.”
Steve Lyle responded to the term “biopesticide,” which would seem incorrect, since all the information available states the pheromone does not harm the insect but only confuses it so it cannot mate. However, he said, “Because the product is deployed in an attempt to eradicate a population [by disrupting the mating cycle] it has to be classified as a pesticide by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Take the very same substance and put it in a sticky trap with the purpose of detecting the moth, and the pheromone is not classified as a pesticide.”
Moira Sullivan, a toxicologist with the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHA), speaking before the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors July 8, described the twist ties: “The apparatus itself is comprised of a plastic tube and has an aluminum wire and a synthetic formulation of a naturally occurring sex attractant produced by the female light brown apple moth. It is chemically indistinguishable from the natural pheromone. The twist tie contains a mixture of just two pheromones: (E)-11-Tetradecenyl Acetate and (E,E)-9,11-Tetradecadienyl Acetate. “Acetates,“ she said, “occur naturally in all living organisms and are broken down by living organisms into acetic acid, vinegar and alcohol – which can be irritants.”
The pheromones make up 95 percent of the Isomate LBAM Plus product. The remaining five percent consists of stabilizers added to protect the longevity of the pheromone. The stabilizers are, at this time, confidential, she said, but the Office of Environmental Hazards Agency has stated that one is an anti-oxidant, a common food additive and approved for use in foods by the FDA, and the other is an ultraviolet (UV) blocker similar to the pheromone itself. The UV blocker has a toxicity rating of 5,000 oral LD50.
To explain the significance of LD50, she presented a chart showing LD50 toxicity rating of various common chemicals on a scale of one to six (LD stands for “lethal dose” which, if given all at once, would cause death in 50 percent of the test animals), with the higher numbers reflecting lesser toxicity. The UV blocker, with an LD50 level of 5,000, was fifth on the scale and listed as “practically nontoxic.” Common table salt, with an LD50 toxicity rating of 3,000, is more toxic.
Some opponents of the twist ties note that no human studies were done. Glenn Brank, of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, said it would be illegal to experiment with pesticides – even ones only technically classified as such – on humans. Opponents of the twist ties also cite the hazard warnings on the product label. When asked why there should be a warning label if a product is harmless, Brank said that any product registered by the EPA has to have a cautionary label.
According to some critics, a more complex question than what’s in the twist ties is whether the eradication program for the LBAM is really needed at all.
James R. Carey, professor and former vice chair, Department of Entomology, University of California, Davis, said, “I know a lot of entomologists who just say, what’s the big deal here? It’s like the Moth of Mass Destruction. It’s just not that big of a deal. But it’s taken on a life of its own.” He’d like to see the policies controlled by the science, not the other way around. “The ag department right now works with the community by telling them what’s going to happen, rather than saying, ‘Let’s get science out there first.’ There’s cherry-picking of science, a lot of half-truths and just distortion of issues here. Let’s get the science out and have an honest, open discussion about this, and then, if there are political decisions to be made, these are transparent.”
Pending legislation supports public involvement
New legislation heading for the desk of Gov. Schwarzenegger reflects some of the demands of protesters and puts public information and people’s health concerns before agricultural pest eradication expediency.
AB 2765, introduced by Assembly member Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael), requires the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to hold public hearings before spraying to discuss alternatives and to disclose elements of the spray to the public. It requires an evaluation of the human and environmental health effects of proposed aerial spray and bars emergency spraying in any urban area without complete disclosure of every ingredient in the formulation “to the extent authorized by law.”
Widespread protests earlier this year following the USDA’s use of an air-born pheromone spray against the light brown apple moth in the Monterey/Santa Cruz area caused Schwarzenegger to put additional spraying on hold and to write legislation to reform the state’s process when considering aerial spray in urban areas. AB 2765 has now passed the Assembly floor with bipartisan support, and is heading to the governor’s desk.
Assembly member Huffman said, “This bill is part of the effort to reconnect people and their government. We think the public needs to know what is proposed, what ingredients are in the spray and what alternatives may be available, before spraying, not as an after-thought. We need to include affected communities in a public process.”
USDA spokesman Steve Lyle said on Aug, 29 that he couldn’t comment on pending legislation. However, he said the current USDA policy is to inform the people who will be affected, telling them when they’ll be in the area, what approach they’ll be using, what type of material will be involved and why the treatment is necessary. “Currently, when an area is determined to necessitate treatment, we hold a public meeting in that area, send invitations and a notice and a package of materials delivered by first class mail to every address in the treatment area.”
Supervisor Valerie Brown, responding via e-mail from the Democratic convention in Denver, said, “I applaud Jared for recognizing that the public needs to be informed when something affects their lives as significantly as aerial spraying. We live in an environment that is trying hard to free itself of pesticides and chemicals that are harmful to our health. Kudos to Jared.”
AB 2765 is supported by a wide consortium of environmental groups including Pesticide Watch, Sierra Club and Marin Organic as well as by the agriculture community. The governor has until the end of September to sign or veto the measure.
