Proceedings of the Sixty-first Annual Meeting of the Northeastern ...
Proceedings of the Sixty-first Annual Meeting of the Northeastern ... Proceedings of the Sixty-first Annual Meeting of the Northeastern ...
184 b. Selection of a WSSA Member for IAFWA’s Invasive Species Committee. Lee said this would be a great opportunity to get one or more weed science members involved and actively promoting the devastation of wildlife habitat loss caused by invasive weeds. The WSSA Provides Comments for the USDA-CSREES Stakeholder Workshop on Plant and Pest Biology Priorities and Concerns On November 16, 2005, the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) hosted a one day workshop on stakeholder priorities in the area of plant and pest biology. Over 20 different stakeholder groups provided comments and concerns during the workshop. Working in conjunction with the WSSA Research and Competitive Grants Committee, written comments were submitted along with an oral presentation by Dr. David Shaw, who did an excellent job in presenting WSSA’s concerns. The WSSA expressed its deep concern with the direction of the NRI Competitive Grants Program 51.9, The Biology of Weedy and Invasive Species in Agroecosystems. This is a significant source of competitively awarded funding for many weed scientists. This grant program now targets not only weedy and invasive plants, but all other invasive species without an increase in funding this year. There are other NRI grant programs that deal with the biology of arthropods, nematodes, and microorganisms which were not opened up to invasion biology for their representative organisms. The WSSA stated that it would like to see invasion biology for different species placed in their respective NRI Programs. Two other concerns the WSSA expressed for the current request for application (RFA) for the NRI Program on The Biology of Weedy and Invasive Species in Agroecosystems were: 1) its focus on ecological studies on invasive species at the population level and above with no emphasis on weed biology at the suborganismal level; and 2) the fact that this is the only NRI Grant Program that now requires a letter of intent, thus reducing the flexibility of weed scientists to consider other NRI Grant Programs and limiting the grant preparation period to less than 1.5 months. The WSSA also provided comments to USDA-CSREES about the need for increased funding for weed science research in the following areas: • Weed Biology and Ecology- Better understanding of weed biology and weed ecology is needed for development of more effective integrated weed management systems which utilize all tools available including cultural, mechanical, biological and chemical control strategies. Weed biology and weed ecology research is also needed to accelerate progress in several areas of weed management such as GPS/GIS based variable rate herbicide applications, herbicide resistant crops (HRC) and knowledge based decision support systems. The value of these management tools depends greatly on better understanding of the mechanisms of weed, crop and cropping system interactions. This includes research in weed genetics and physiology. • Invasive Weeds- Predictive tools are needed to identify species of concern and potential for invasion into sensitive ecosystems. Systems for early detection and rapid response (EDRR) are also needed to combat potentially serious weed invasions caused by human activity, whether accidental or intentional. Development of tools to assess impacts of weeds on ecosystems, including threatened and endangered species, requires basic research on the mechanisms of plant invasion. Economic assessment tools are also needed to quantify the impacts of the problem and to help set management priorities. 166
185 • Knowledge Based and Systems-Approach Based Decision Support Strategies- With the proliferation of computer technology there are good opportunities to build decision aids that integrate biology and control data, expert knowledge and grower wisdom with social, economic and environmental perspectives. To build these systems, more long- term and large-scale studies are necessary with growers and advisors included in their development. The variable response of crops and weeds according to species, growth stage and environmental conditions also needs further research. EPA Issues Endangered Species Protection Program Guidance The EPA published its “Endangered Species Protection Program Field Implementation Notice” in the November, 2, 2005 Federal Register. The document can be found at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2005/November/Day-02/p21838.htm. It formalizes a lengthy review process between EPA and other federal agencies on how the EPA addresses concerns about endangered species when it reviews pesticide registrations while not placing undue burden on pesticide users. EPA will implement the Endangered Species Protection Program through pesticide label statements that refer users to Endangered Species Protection Bulletins. These bulletins will only be issued when specific pesticide use limitations are necessary to protect federally listed species or their designated critical habitat and will be available via the EPA's Website or via a toll free number, both of which will be identified on the new pesticide label once it’s available. Other News regarding Endangered Species: "US House Backs Changes in Endangered Species Act" is the title of a September 30 Reuters report which states in part that " ... In a bid to reshape decades of US environmental policy, the US House of Representatives on Thursday approved legislation to overhaul the Endangered Species Act and make it harder to shield the habitat of plants and animals threatened with extinction. The bill was approved by a 229-193 vote. The White House supports the legislation, although it does want some changes. The Senate has not yet taken up companion legislation and is unlikely to accept such drastic revisions in the law, originally enacted in 1973, so some compromises are likely if the bill is ever to become law. Many Republicans and Democrats alike want to update and streamline the current law, better defining the scientific standards that will apply to protecting endangered species and trying to reduce the number of lawsuits that arise. But they disagree over many of the specifics. The bill authored by House Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo, a California Republican, includes more protections and payments for property owners and developers. Critics say it would rely too much on voluntary conservation efforts by the private sector. The Pombo bill would address property owners' and business groups' complaints and set up a system for government payments when land cannot be developed due to an endangered species. It also eases some limitations on certain pesticides ... Most Democrats and some moderate Rep1ublicans backed an alternative bill that they said would do more to ensure that new 'species recovery plans' protect the wildlife. The Natural Resources Defense Council said in a statement that the Pombo bill would lead to more extinctions ... Democratic critics of the Pombo bill said current law has helped protect the Florida manatee, the California condor and the bald eagle, and that the bill would threaten that progress ..." - The complete text of the Reuters story is posted at http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/32739/story.htm - The Bill, H.R. 3824, as approved by the full US House of Representatives, would " ... amend and reauthorize the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide greater results conserving and recovering listed species, and for other purposes ..." and is posted at http://clerk.house.gov/cgibin/lgwww_bill.pl?203824 167
- Page 134 and 135: 134 HORSEWEED RESPONSE TO NO-TILL P
- Page 136 and 137: 136 THE MASSACHUSETTS EXAMPLE: ONE
- Page 138 and 139: 138 Supplemental NEWSS Abstracts (p
- Page 140 and 141: 140 ABSTRACTS AND BIOGRAPHIES FOR P
- Page 142 and 143: 142 EVALUATION OF AN HERBICIDE APPL
- Page 144 and 145: 144 ALUMINUM TREATMENT FOR PHOSPHOR
- Page 146 and 147: 146 BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF AQUATIC W
- Page 148 and 149: 148 THE 2002 FARM BILL AND ITS EFFE
- Page 150 and 151: 150 LAND USE PRACTICE IMPACTS ON NO
- Page 152 and 153: 152 A NEW STANDARD FOR DEFINING AQU
- Page 154 and 155: 154 PORTRAIT OF THE HEALTH STATUS O
- Page 156 and 157: 156 TEN YEARS OF VARIABLE WATER MIL
- Page 158 and 159: 158 Northeastern Weed Science Socie
- Page 160 and 161: 160 meeting attendance numbers have
- Page 162 and 163: 162 members or to members of the Ex
- Page 164 and 165: 164 primary areas that had increase
- Page 166 and 167: 166 1 st place: Evaluation of Kentu
- Page 168 and 169: 168 d) Resolutions Committee Appoin
- Page 170 and 171: 170 2005, Hilary Sandler and Brent
- Page 172 and 173: 172 (Ornamentals), Rakesh Chandran
- Page 174 and 175: 174 Total Expenses $38,227.24 Total
- Page 176 and 177: 176 PUBLIC RELATIONS Brent Lackey A
- Page 178 and 179: 178 • 2 nd place team: Guelph tea
- Page 180 and 181: 180 WSSA REPRESENTATIVE Jeffrey Der
- Page 182 and 183: 182 b. Legislative Visits training
- Page 186 and 187: 186 WSSA Provides Comments to the C
- Page 188 and 189: 188 $179 million, in contrast to a
- Page 190 and 191: 190 NEWSS PAST PRESIDENTS Gilbert H
- Page 192 and 193: 192 1986 John R. Havis University o
- Page 194 and 195: 194 DISTINGUISHED MEMBERS 2002 Brad
- Page 196 and 197: 196 1991 1 Elizabeth Maynard Cornel
- Page 198 and 199: 198 COLLEGIATE WEED CONTEST WINNERS
- Page 200 and 201: 200 1996 - Penn State Agronomy Farm
- Page 202 and 203: 202 RESEARCH POSTER AWARDS 1983 1.
- Page 204 and 205: 204 1998 1. Weed Control Studies wi
- Page 206 and 207: 206 INNOVATOR OF THE YEAR 1986 Nath
- Page 208 and 209: 208 1960 The Influence of Cultivati
- Page 210 and 211: 210 1975 1. Control of Jimsonweed a
- Page 212 and 213: 212 1985 1. Peach Response to Sever
- Page 214 and 215: 214 Chris Benedict Cornell Universi
- Page 216 and 217: 216 Robert A. DeWaine Monsanto 505
- Page 218 and 219: 218 Robert Hedberg USDA/CSREES Scie
- Page 220 and 221: 220 Brian G Lackey Weeds Inc. 250 B
- Page 222 and 223: 222 Thomas Molloy University of Mai
- Page 224 and 225: 224 John Roy RWC, Inc. PO Box 876 2
- Page 226 and 227: 226 John R. Teasdale USDA-ARS Build
- Page 228 and 229: 228 HERBICIDE NAMES: COMMON, TRADE,
- Page 230 and 231: 230 Common Name Trade Name Chemical
- Page 232 and 233: 232 Common Name Trade Name Chemical
185<br />
• Knowledge Based and Systems-Approach Based Decision Support Strategies- With <strong>the</strong><br />
proliferation <strong>of</strong> computer technology <strong>the</strong>re are good opportunities to build decision aids that<br />
integrate biology and control data, expert knowledge and grower wisdom with social,<br />
economic and environmental perspectives. To build <strong>the</strong>se systems, more long- term and<br />
large-scale studies are necessary with growers and advisors included in <strong>the</strong>ir development.<br />
The variable response <strong>of</strong> crops and weeds according to species, growth stage and<br />
environmental conditions also needs fur<strong>the</strong>r research.<br />
EPA Issues Endangered Species Protection Program Guidance<br />
The EPA published its “Endangered Species Protection Program Field Implementation Notice”<br />
in <strong>the</strong> November, 2, 2005 Federal Register. The document can be found at<br />
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2005/November/Day-02/p21838.htm. It<br />
formalizes a lengthy review process between EPA and o<strong>the</strong>r federal agencies on how <strong>the</strong> EPA<br />
addresses concerns about endangered species when it reviews pesticide registrations while not<br />
placing undue burden on pesticide users. EPA will implement <strong>the</strong> Endangered Species<br />
Protection Program through pesticide label statements that refer users to Endangered Species<br />
Protection Bulletins. These bulletins will only be issued when specific pesticide use limitations<br />
are necessary to protect federally listed species or <strong>the</strong>ir designated critical habitat and will be<br />
available via <strong>the</strong> EPA's Website or via a toll free number, both <strong>of</strong> which will be identified on <strong>the</strong><br />
new pesticide label once it’s available.<br />
O<strong>the</strong>r News regarding Endangered Species:<br />
"US House Backs Changes in Endangered Species Act" is <strong>the</strong> title <strong>of</strong> a September 30 Reuters<br />
report which states in part that " ... In a bid to reshape decades <strong>of</strong> US environmental policy, <strong>the</strong><br />
US House <strong>of</strong> Representatives on Thursday approved legislation to overhaul <strong>the</strong> Endangered<br />
Species Act and make it harder to shield <strong>the</strong> habitat <strong>of</strong> plants and animals threatened with<br />
extinction. The bill was approved by a 229-193 vote. The White House supports <strong>the</strong> legislation,<br />
although it does want some changes. The Senate has not yet taken up companion legislation<br />
and is unlikely to accept such drastic revisions in <strong>the</strong> law, originally enacted in 1973, so some<br />
compromises are likely if <strong>the</strong> bill is ever to become law. Many Republicans and Democrats alike<br />
want to update and streamline <strong>the</strong> current law, better defining <strong>the</strong> scientific standards that will<br />
apply to protecting endangered species and trying to reduce <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> lawsuits that arise.<br />
But <strong>the</strong>y disagree over many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> specifics. The bill authored by House Resources Committee<br />
Chairman Richard Pombo, a California Republican, includes more protections and payments for<br />
property owners and developers. Critics say it would rely too much on voluntary conservation<br />
efforts by <strong>the</strong> private sector. The Pombo bill would address property owners' and business<br />
groups' complaints and set up a system for government payments when land cannot be<br />
developed due to an endangered species. It also eases some limitations on certain pesticides ...<br />
Most Democrats and some moderate Rep1ublicans backed an alternative bill that <strong>the</strong>y said<br />
would do more to ensure that new 'species recovery plans' protect <strong>the</strong> wildlife. The Natural<br />
Resources Defense Council said in a statement that <strong>the</strong> Pombo bill would lead to more<br />
extinctions ... Democratic critics <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Pombo bill said current law has helped protect <strong>the</strong> Florida<br />
manatee, <strong>the</strong> California condor and <strong>the</strong> bald eagle, and that <strong>the</strong> bill would threaten that progress<br />
..." - The complete text <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Reuters story is posted at<br />
http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/32739/story.htm - The Bill, H.R.<br />
3824, as approved by <strong>the</strong> full US House <strong>of</strong> Representatives, would " ... amend and reauthorize<br />
<strong>the</strong> Endangered Species Act <strong>of</strong> 1973 to provide greater results conserving and recovering listed<br />
species, and for o<strong>the</strong>r purposes ..." and is posted at http://clerk.house.gov/cgibin/lgwww_bill.pl?203824<br />
167