The Ojai Post

I'm all for having a discussion about this issue, but I couldn't get past the first minute because the hyperbole is so distasteful.

She's "under siege"? Really? Try living in Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Darfur, a favella in Brazil, or even a drug and crime ridden U.S. inner city.

I know that as a culture we like to overstate things (super size it!) but that doesn't make it OK. Again, pesticide use isn't trivial, but step back and try to get some perspective, eh?

Bravo. Thanks for making this Chris, and posting it Didj. Spraying this so called harmless pesticide without the majority consent of the residents of the area is criminal negligence. The organic standards that approve of this particular chemical have been being lowered and compromised as the years go by. The eco-system is out of balance, spraying will not bring it into balance. Humans can be much to impatient when it comes to earth's timing and take the lazy, quick fix approach. Relax, the moths serve a purpose, get a groove on and listen to more Marvin.

Where to start................

A. The workers are not wearing space suits since BT is not a poison or a nerve agent. Bt is a physical killer that creates crystals in the gut of a worm since they have a alkalized gut. Mammals, birds, reptiles have a acid gut so there is no crystallization so no harm is done. For a Bt to work the worm has to ingest it, Bt is not a contact killer. Please explain how a non contact killer can harm the environment?

B. The Gypsy moth is not native to the US so there are no predators to kill the eggs. The moths are not vital to the eco-system they are an invasive species, like the fresh water mussels that threatens lake Casitis.

C. Bt will not harm the soil. Dipel has been researched by the Organic Materials Review Institute specifically looking at inerts, and continues to approved for organic farming.

D. Conflating the pesticides used for Ag in Ventura county with the Bt spraying is misleading. Yes, the use of toxic pesticides is a crime. But Bt is a non-toxic pesticide. The use of the word pesticide does not automatically mean the substance is a threat to humans or the eco-system. Scalding hot steam is used to kill weeds in organic fields and it is considered a pesticide. There are safety concerns with steam so there are warnings on how to use it.

E. The claim that the gypsy month does no harm to the woods in eastern US is a bold faced lie. Just check government records on the deforestation caused the moths. They defoliate trees, primarily oaks; no leaves, no photosynthesis, the trees die. Yes, eastern states spend large sums of money spraying toxic pesticides on vast areas of forest to try to slow down the moths. Bt's are NOT the pesticide of choice in most states. We are lucky that CA is using a non-toxic material.

By creating a video that is so full of inaccuracies the anti-pesticide group is doing harm to a worthy cause of ridding the world of truly harmful chemicals.

Raymond you are just tooooo hip!

Thank you, George!

Okay, I'm on a tear, here!

Raymond, you state "praying this so called harmless pesticide without the majority consent of the residents of the area is criminal negligence."

Have you ever been in an area devastated by this nonnative moth?

Letting this happen to California's ecosystem would be criminal negligence. It could forever change what this ecosystem looks like. These moths could, if left unchecked, potentially wipe out the oaks in this valley. Is that worth having happen because you don't like the idea of any insecticide?

Fundamentalism is just that, regardless of where it lands on the ideology scale. And lies are lies, regardless of how good the intentions are that propagate them.

With all due respect to Ms. Appleby, the reason gypsy moths are in this country is because a person screwed up and imported them, looking for a new version of the silk moth. As George said, they're not native. And they're not some bell weather that are going to magically tell us what the trees need. The trees don't need gypsy moths. Period. This is NOT a naturally occurring insect in this country.

With all due respect to Mr. Schmidt, the reason the gypsy moths didn't destroy Pittsburgh area trees is because they sprayed there! (From planes, no less.) And oddly enough, people are still thriving in Pittsburgh.

There is no natural balance with these moths. They have very few natural predators in the US, and the fantasy that the birds and animals adapted to keep them in check is absolute nonsense.

And to his not being sure what they eat? They eat leaves. Their favorites are oaks. Figure it out.

This is utterly irresponsible propaganda. If you want to make a case about why spraying moths are bad, actually interviewing people who have a clue about these insects and this insecticide works would be a great place to start.

To those folks who are trying to figure out how they feel about all of this -- please, go look around. Do your homework. There is lots of information about these moths and this insecticide on the internet -- look for neutral sources, not the fear mongers.

Thanks,
Leigh

Scientific facts can be spewed endlessly about the dangers of the Gypsy Moth, but we really are dealing with a serious chemical treadmill organic or not. Putting more pesticides into our environment short term or long term is not a solution. Are we as a community going to all put our faith into the same institution that said DDT was a safe insecticide. Something to think about.

It's worth noting that Bt or Dipel and Dimilin are not the same. The state is spraying Dipel which has a lessor effect on insects for a shorter time. Nevertheless, say bye bye to butterflies in the sprayed areas for awhile, probably this season.

I don't like spraying, but if you are going to spray something, this stuff is the least troubling. A man in the video says that the gypsy moth had no effect on the trees back east. That is likely because the trees were fairly healthy and because the moth was sprayed (probably with something a lot more dangerous and harmful than Dipel), therefore the larvae ate less than fifty percent of the canopy. If the trees had been unhealthy or if the moths hadn't been reduced in number so that they could eat more than fifty percent of the trees' canopies, the trees would have died.

It's a simple cost benefit analysis where we weigh the existence of our Oak trees against cutting the population of the Gypsy Moth using sprays. Our Oaks are dropping in number and many of them are unhealthy to begin with. If the moth infestation were to go untreated, most of these Oaks would die. The spray is not used uniformly everywhere. The goal is to reduce the population so the larvae can't eat more than fifty percent of the leaves. The trees can handle that much. The more interesting thing about the spraying to me is the fact that it is happening, at least in the video, in a mobil home park. I wonder if spraying in lower income neighborhoods is intentional? I wonder if they are planning on spraying in Ranch Matilija or the East End for instance. There's a whole lot of foliage there that could be sprayed and those places are adjacent to lots of Oaks that would benefit from the moth reduction. Do you think they will be spraying in those neighborhoods? Maybe not.

Gypsy moths are bad, but what we really need to be worrying about are the gypsy vagrants at the Matilija Hot Spring. Just two years ago, we would go up for an early 5:30 in the morning soak and there wouldn't be a soul there. The occasional gypsy would flutter in and we would enjoy the company... Now, the cars are lined up at all hours and gypsies are sleeping along the banks of the river. Talk about wearing out your welcome! I'm a sensible guy and I enjoy visiting places around the world, but I'm always cognizant of other people and their sense of open space. Does anyone have a recommendation for a good organic spray that might knock back the population of gypsies??

I'm thinking about starting a rumor that the herbicide spraying in the canyon causes acute toxicity and produces ailments such as: the inability to do a sun salutation, memory loss, headaches, anger towards gypsies, appetite loss, etc. Ideas, anyone?

that's no rumor, it's true!

don't mention "appetite loss" or people will think it's part of a weight-loss program.

Chris:

I appreciate your intentions and am not a lover of chemicals either, but facts are facts, however pesky they may be. Essentially what you're saying is "don't let the facts get in the way of our fear."

I just think this is a pointless fight. It's not as if this is about making sure that a certain vegetable doesn't have flaws when it goes to the supermarket, or anything frivolous -- or even to benefit humans at the cost of the rest of the planet, like DDT. This is an effort to keep a highly invasive species from potentially destroying an ecosystem.

If there is such concern about chemicals in the valley, I'm wondering why there isn't equal outrage about the MTBE in Lake Casitas, for example? Not a lot to be said in defense of that, and a FAR greater risk to the health and welfare of valley residents.

Sean --a couple of points in your post that I wanted to.

First, trees have died in PA. A lot of the ridges (where the moths land first, windblown from ridge to ridge) look pretty dang bald in areas with bad infestations. You're absolutely right that a healthy tree can generally stand a one-year onslaught (hardwoods, at least), but if they are hit hard more than one year, most trees will die. And softwoods, like hemlocks, die year one, usually. And there was extensive spraying -- still is -- going on in PA. Last summer when I was home visiting my folks they were doing aerial spraying over parts of State College, where I grew up.

And they take out oaks. From a NYT OpEd piece from the Executive Director for Environmental Concerns, in MA, the"...mortality of the white oak was 58 percent, black and scarlet oak 55 percent and red oak 27 percent during the 1911 to 1922 gypsy moth episode."
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/07/15/nyregion/l-gypsy-moth-spraying-other-views-708090.html?sec=&spon

Once the moth has gotten established, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to eradicate. There have been eradication efforts ongoing since before 1900.

And I wanted to respond to your wondering about the location of the spraying, Sean, because this is, I think, precisely how rumors get started. They are spraying in a particular area because in that area, gypsy moths were found. They've quarantined the particular area -- this has absolutely NOTHING to do with income levels or anything like that. It's a defined area that was first quarantined and is now being sprayed in an effort to knock these bugs back.

(So if you're gonna be pissed at someone, why not be pissed off at the idiot who brought the moths into the valley in the first place? When we moved to CA with all of our belongings, we had to unpack an entire 24 foot Ryder truck to get to the bikes inside to make sure there weren't any moths or egg cases on them. Yes, it was a pain. But our couple of hours of inconvenience were a reasonable trade off for being sure we didn't end up being a modern version of Typhoid Mary. Whomever brought the moths in were either really careless or outright lied to the folks checking at the CA borders.)

Part of what makes me so batsh** crazy about all of this is that there seems to be an inability to tell the difference between opinions and facts. What you got in Chris' film were two heartfelt opinions about why spraying is bad -- neither of them even vaguely encumbered by anything factual.

Sean, I think you got it dead on -- this is a simple question of risk assessment and cost benefit analysis.

Okay, I'm done. Please return to your regularly scheduled programming!

:-)
Leigh

Before even considering pesticide use, we first need to understand the life cycle and morphology of the target pest. Get to know your Gypsy moth and understand that if left unchecked, the Gypsy moth will be the downfall of our healthy oak woodland. The same applies to herbicides. Get to know your Arundo and understand that Arundo will be the ultimate demise of any healthy watershed.

Most of us agree that the days of blindly spraying chemicals into the air (like Post World War II America) without regard to reproductive rates or adaptive traits of species appears to be gone, at least in many California counties. Integrated Pest Management is a principal tool in most agricultural communities and it helps minimize application time and exposure. But integrated pest management alone is just a tool and it will never be a solution to our pest problems. We’ve seen that pesticide use can help diminish the pest population for one or two generations, but because reproductive rates are high, adaptation occurs more frequently and the pest becomes resistant over time. So then higher concentrations of the pesticide are needed to get the same results and then continues. This is often referred to as the pesticide treadmill. And once you’re on the treadmill, it’s really hard to get off. I see IPM as a band aid shoring up the terrible would of poor agricultural practices and mono cropping. Diversity in crops alone can solve many pest problems.

But I think that today we face a much larger problem ahead of us and this problem is the exponentially increasing shift in baseline ecological conditions throughout the world.

For the last 4 years, I’ve been working with the bark beetle problem in the Angeles and San Bernardino National Forests. The problem has become so severe, that these forests are considered California State disaster areas. These beetles (varying subspecies) attack certain trees that are stressed due to lack of water, disease, or pollution. They bore through the tree’s bark, lay eggs inside, and remain in the tree for up to a year until it is completely void of life. The proliferation of the beetles has become more severe because the combination of drought and a shorter winter (frost period) have enabled the beetles to over-winter and reproduce without natural conditions keeping them under control. What we are generally looking at, is a shift in environmental conditions caused by changing global temperatures. Fighting these beetles with insecticides is not a viable solution as there is too much ground to cover and too many other species could be impacted by the falling out of chemicals. But on other hand, none of the species will exist at all when the forest is gone.

The integrated pest management approach without the use of insecticides has explored pheromone confusion, which essentially confuses male bark beetles from finding their mates during breeding. This could be a good solution over time, but if proven effective, the costs are very high. So when scientific programs like these lose their funding and we siphon more federal funds into war and other such ridiculous programs, I often ask questions like: What is the ultimate cost of losing our resources and habitat? What is the ultimate cost of losing our oak trees in Ojai? What is the ultimate cost of losing our riparian ecosystems? In the short run, I think we need to continue to study our pests and not lose track of the fact that we can’t forfeit our oaks or our streams by turning our attention to just one aspect of a very large problem. We all come from different experiences and perspectives on this, and I’m certainly not saying mine is exactly right, but can we afford to sacrifice the entire forest by not doing anything at all? I believe this is a very important question that Pesticide Free Ojai should address in their much needed efforts to stop the blind use of chemicals in our community.

We should all be thinking about what is best for keeping the Ojai community healthy. It's important to think about the well being of our residents especially the elderly, and the children. A healthy ecosystem in our valley, free of pesticides is a win win for everyone, which includes responsible stewardship of the land far into the future. We sometimes forget that humans are a part of a larger web of life, and are not separate from their environment.

And it might be important to point out that human health is a lot more important than worrying about a simple cost benefit analysis. We should have a right to say no to pesticides, especially when it directly affects our immediate living environment.

Thanks for the comment and information Brian. Pesticide Free Ojai Valley is exploring alternative ways to help keep our ecosystem in check. We certainly want to protect our oak forests, and we are committed to researching and implementing less toxic methods. And we welcome ideas and information from the community about alternative methods.

Seems a few people are getting a little overexcited about all this.

Did you know that BT is a certified organic pesticide?

http://www.dirtdoctor.com/view_question.php?id=184

I posted more info and links here:

http://venturaecosystem.blogspot.com/2009/03/gypsy-moth-controversy.html

"Simple" cost benefit analysis does not mean that the analysis itself is simple. In fact, the analysis necisarilly must take into account human health issues. It should also take into account socioeconomic bias of areas sprayed. .

All that aside, is Pesticide Free Ojai prepared to be responsible for the deaths of all of the valley's Oaks because of their inflexible position against even "organic pesticides"? .

Our life is not seperate from the moth or trees. We spray the moth we spray ourselves. The CDFA lady said workers don't have protective gear because they didn't want it to look dangerous. There is some use of the word propoganda ...tell monsanto and dipel people that too.I did some home work and got propoganda from Rincon Vitova Ron; about there aren't that many butterflies out now and the spray only effects people with immune system problems, please.
Its a moth not hitler or bush, if we can't hear nature we can't hear its solutions. First we must listen: NO WAR ON NATURE, Dipel is poison:YA BASTA!!! ...peace

Hey this is Ojai, Sunshine lives in a trail park, she can't move yesterday. A lawn care company came in a sprayed her reality with a hose. The whole video shows the applicator guy recoil when the spray is caught by wind and blown back into his face. I only watched it once but if I recall his head dipped down below his waist to escape ....?
Dipel is approved for Organic application, but not in this quanilty, IMHO.

I notice that the Ventura river is marked on the official CA state quarantine maps as an "environmentally sensitive area, no treatment" with a "200 foot buffer zone, no treatment" around it and yet my veggie garden and I are somehow less sensitive?

I also notice the language in the county's vague information flyers state that Gypsy Moths have been know to harm "oak-like trees". Is there any real evidence that these moths do in fact harm costal or valley oaks? Seems like a bit of a leap here. What's "oak-like" mean? Does it just mean "hardwood" or something less general?

I also notice that county was already stepping outside the State's boundary for the quarantine over a month ago. My property is outside the quarantine area and yet we were invaded with less than 24 hours notice.

Ref: http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/GypsyMoth

Yeah, not real impressed that they appear to be spraying Meiners Oaks exclusively. As far as I can tell, the purpose of the spraying is to knock down the population so it can't overwhelm the trees, this means spraying a percentage of the area in which the moth has been found. Is it odd that they are only spraying an area that is not higher on the socioeconomic ladder? Couldn't they just as easily spray areas that were in Rancho Matilija or the East End or the hillsides of Ojai proper above Summer St. It would be interesting to know what prompted this map.

One of the residents in Meiners Oaks, Vivienne Jacob was notified during a public meeting at Nordhoff high school by the California Department of Agriculture, that she had the right to refuse the spraying of Dipel on her property. She was recently visited by employees from the CDFA and Ventura County, who made attempts to convince her of the importance of spraying the pesticide around her residence. They mentioned bringing in the district attorney and eventually spraying stronger pesticides around her property if she didn't agree to this round of spraying. She has finally capitulated because she feels that she doesn't have the resources to defend her right to say no to the spraying of Dipel. Is this any way to treat the elder citizens of our valley ?

so today they are supposed to be doing some sprayings along the watershed area -- burnham n rice? does anyone know more about this?

City folks don't mind breathing auto exhaust or drinking chlorinated water every day even though both are known poisons in concentrated amounts. Yet they go ballistic over a one time spraying of highly diluted DIPEL - a chemical that is non-toxic to humans, birds, pets, etc.

So what we are really dealing with here is mass prejudice - a mass KKK type public lynching of a chemical that has no history of ever harming humans, birds, pets, etc., despite decades of use.

Butterflies will continue to be commonly seen in the DIPEL treated areas all spring and summer. Moths will continue to swarm around street lights on warm nights. The CDFA and the pesticide companies could make YouTube videos of the abundant butterflies and moths for days/weeks/months after the spraying.

spray me, splay me, spway me..

Hey. How do you do? Help me! It has to find sites on the: Satellite tv business. I found only this - watch satellite tv for free. Satellite tv, the digital photo using deal of people during regulations occupied the european width of exhibitionfirst. Not removed to special clients, you would make this however european and important, satellite tv. THX :eek:, Amador from Chile.