hunterbishop.com

I see in the draft environmental assessment that there are two reasons given for the state's planned strawberry guava attack.

The first is to protect native forests from the spread of strawberry guava. The second is to save money for agri-business by reducing the fruit fly population which thrives on wild strawberry guava. Millions of dollars are spent on quarantine and eradication of fruit flies annually by taxpayers and farmers in Hawaii, according to the report.

I just can't figure out from the report how this plan would eliminate the need to treat ag products for fruit flies before export since it will not eliminate fruit flies.

Nevertheless scientists want to introduce an insect from Brazil that will disfigure Hawaii's strawberry guava trees and prevent them from producing good fruit, thus inhibiting the spread of strawberry guava in Hawaii's native forests.

Puna's Olaa Forest Preserve would be the first experimental site for the release of the insect but the intent is to release them statewide, affecting all strawberry guava everywhere in Hawaii. Researchers say that the insects will attack only strawberry guava and begin to have an effect in two or three years. The initial release would cost about $50,000.

"Its impacts are expected to be highly beneficial to non-target species, in helping protect large areas of native forest from being invaded and dominated by strawberry guava, and contributing to large scale control of pest fruit flies."

Of course if you like strawberry guava, too bad. You will have to use insecticides to preserve your plants, the report says.

The other stated reason for the project is to protect native forests from the uncontrolled growth of strawberry guava. The weed, as it's called, is reported to be one of the most serious threats to vulnerable native forest ecosystems. " ...  long term protection of native forests, including many native rainforest species of importance in Hawaiian culture, from degradation by strawberry guava is expected to provide cultural benefits that far outweigh the value of strawberry guava as a resource in itself."

But there are no guarantees that the insect (T. ovatus) will keep to its liking for only strawberry guava. "T. ovatus has few close relatives, which suggests limited potential for evolution to use new host plants. (But there) have been very few studies of this group of insects, none of them recent.

"Once a biological control agent such as T. ovatus is released into the environment and becomes established, there is a slight possibility that it could move from the target plant (strawberry guava) to attack nontarget plants. ... Historically, host shifts by introduced weed biological control agents to unrelated plants are extremely rare. If other plant species were to be attacked by T. ovatus, the resulting effects could be environmental impacts that may not be easily reversed."

The plan could also trigger "(i)ndirect impacts on nontarget species," which have been documented in a few cases of this kind of "weed biocontrol,"  but, "unfortunately the ability to predict such effects remains poor ... . Pigs, which feed heavily on strawberry guava fruit when it is in season, may be forced to find other food sources in the short term and may experience reduced population growth in the long term."

The report also notes "uncertainty associated with the eventual impact of T. ovatus on strawberry guava." In other words, the insects might not even work as advertised. Observations in Brazil and laboratory tests indicate that the insect can significantly impact individual strawberry guava plants, but the results may vary significantly, the report said. "Worldwide, biological weed control programs have had an overall success rate of 33 percent."

Meanwhile, the National Park Service has managed to effect "dramatic reductions" of strawberry guava in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park without resorting to alien insects, according to the report. "Dramatic reductions in density of strawberry guava and other weeds have been achieved within these limited areas, and the labor to maintain low weed density declines after the initial large investment."

The report sums up the proposal saying it "is intended to result in a permanent reduction of wild fruits of strawberry guava, which are considered a cultural resource by some Hawai’i residents who have occasionally collected fruits for consumption. However, the loss of this resource is expected to have great benefits for the natural environment by protecting existing native forest, watershed and habitat for native plants and animals from invasion by one of Hawai’i’s most destructive environmental weeds. These benefits to the natural environment will also accrue significant cultural benefits in that many native species of importance in Hawaiian culture will be protected from the deleterious effects of strawberry guava."

Oh, and there was one other reason for the experiment: "Impacts on public utility rights-of way are expected to be positive, in that slower growth of strawberry guava is expected to result in lower costs required for weed control under utility lines."

"If no action is taken, decline in endangered plant populations are probable and extinctions are possible (italics added) as a result of continuing invasions by strawberry guava," the report said.

However it's difficult to see how this project is anything other than an ill-conceived experiment using the entire state as its laboratory. It could work just as researchers think it will, or it could go irreversibly awry and cause untold damage. Shouldn't we have a better assessment of the risks and "possible" rewards before proceeding with a project like this? Reading this draft environmental assessment didn't demonstrate to me that it's worth the risk of introducing a new species to Hawaii. More convincing assurances that it will do what is intended without causing additional problems are needed before I would be satisfied there is an acceptable amount of risk in moving forward with this plan.

Thanks to Syd Singer for raising the issue. Singer, meanwhile, send me the following e-mail:

Guess what?  The Proposing Agency listed in the Environmental Report was incorrect!  At least that's the story of the Plant Pest Control Branch.  They say comments should be going, not to them, but to the USDA Forest Service, which is the agency that prepared the DEA.  The OEQC says they were told it was the PPB.  So I am demanding that a new announcement be made in the Env. Report with another 30 day comment period, and am also requesting that they hold public HEARINGS since this affects everyone in Hawaii.  They tried to get this approved under the radar, but the light is shining bright now!  (Sorry for mixing metaphors.)  Below is the corrected contact info, so please still send comments to them, anyway, since I don't know what will happen.

 

Email comments to tracyjohnson@fs.fed.us with a copy to oeqc@doh.hawaii.gov and

savetheguava@gmail.com .

Or mail comments to : Tracy Johnson, Ph.D., USDA Forest Service, P.O. Box 236,

Volcano, Hawaii 96785

Or call the USDA FS at 808-967-7122.