DOCSLIB.ORG

Stopping New Invasive Species

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Stopping New Invasive Species Environmental Biosecurity Submission 74 Stopping New Invasive Species PRIMARY SUBMISSION Submission to the inquiry into the adequacy of arrangements to prevent the entry and establishment of invasive species likely to harm Australia's natural environment conducted by the Senate Environment and Communications References Committee September 2014 Environmental Biosecurity Submission 74 Note: This updated primary submission replaces the preliminary submission made by the Invasive Species Council in August 2014. Substantive changes to the submission are the addition of summaries at the start of each chapter and an expanded section summarising the case studies. This submission is supported by a compilation of case studies that is also submitted to the inquiry. Submission details Primary submission version 2.1 Invasive Species Council, 10 September 2014 Inquiries Invasive Species Council, PO Box 166, Fairfield Vic 3078; web: www.invasives.org.au; email: [email protected]; phone: 0438 588 040. Contact: Andrew Cox, CEO Environmental Biosecurity Submission 74 CONTENTS 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Australia’s environmental biosecurity track record ........................................................................ 4 1.2 Differences between agricultural and environmental biosecurity .................................................. 6 2. Recent biosecurity performance ........................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Incursions ........................................................................................................................................ 9 Relevant to ToR (a)(i): the extent of detected incursions, including numbers, locations and species, and their potential future environmental, social and economic impacts ........................... 9 2.2 Interceptions ................................................................................................................................. 16 Relevant to ToR (a)(iii): the extent of quarantine interceptions of exotic organisms with the potential to harm the natural environment, including numbers, locations, species and potential impacts ............................................................................................................................................ 16 2.3 Adequacy of reporting ................................................................................................................... 21 Relevant to ToR (b)(vii): the adequacy of reporting on incursions ................................................. 21 2.4 Learning from interceptions and incursions – reviews and analyses ............................................ 22 Relevant to ToR (a) (iv) Any reviews or analyses of detected incursions or interceptions relevant to the environment and any changes in biosecurity processes resulting from those reviews or analyses. ......................................................................................................................................... 22 3. Incursion case studies ......................................................................................................................... 24 Relevant to ToR (a)(ii): the likely pathways of recently detected incursions and any weaknesses in biosecurity that have facilitated their entry and establishment ..................................................... 24 Relevant to ToR (a)(iv): any reviews or analyses of detected incursions or interceptions relevant to the environment and any changes in biosecurity processes resulting from those reviews or analyses .......................................................................................................................................... 24 4. Risk assessment & prioritisation ......................................................................................................... 29 4.1 Identifying environmental risks and priorities .............................................................................. 29 Relevant to ToR (b)(i): the extent to which high priority risks for the environment have been identified in terms of both organisms and pathways, and accorded priority in relation to other biosecurity priorities ....................................................................................................................... 29 4.2 Product-specific risk assessments ................................................................................................. 33 Relevant to ToR (b)(i), (ii): the extent to which high priority risks for the environment have been identified and the process for determining priorities for import risk analyses and the process for prioritising the preparation of these analyses. ............................................................................... 33 5. Biosecurity planning ............................................................................................................................ 36 Relevant to ToR (b)(iii): the current approach to contingency planning for high priority environmental risks and the process by which they were developed ............................................ 36 6. Surveillance and monitoring ............................................................................................................... 38 Relevant to ToR (b)(iv): the adequacy of current protocols and surveillance and their implementation for high-priority environmental risks ................................................................... 38 1 Environmental Biosecurity Submission 74 7. National emergency preparedness and response arrangements (Terrestrial only) ............................ 42 7.1 Flaws in the incursion response framework .................................................................................. 46 Relevant to ToR (b)(v): current systems for responses to newly detected incursions, the timeliness and adequacy, and the role of ecological expertise ....................................................................... 46 7.2 Precautionary principle ................................................................................................................ 49 Relevant to ToR (b)(v): current systems for responses to newly detected incursions, the timeliness and adequacy, and the role of ecological expertise ....................................................................... 49 8. Enforcement ........................................................................................................................................ 52 Relevant to ToR (b) (vi): the extent to which compliance monitoring and enforcement activities are focused on high priority environmental risks ........................................................................... 52 9. Community engagement ..................................................................................................................... 56 Relevant to ToR (b)(vii): the adequacy of … engagement of the community. ................................ 56 10. Reporting and transparency ........................................................................................................... 61 Relevant to ToR (b)(vii) the adequacy of reporting on incursions and transparency in decision- making ............................................................................................................................................ 61 11. Biosecurity institutions and culture ................................................................................................ 63 Relevant to ToR (b)(viii): institutional arrangements for environmental biosecurity and potential improvements ................................................................................................................................. 63 12. Proposal for Environment Health Australia .................................................................................... 66 Relevant to ToR (b) (viii): institutional arrangements for environmental biosecurity and potential improvements ................................................................................................................................. 66 13. The importance of island biosecurity ............................................................................................. 70 Relevant to ToR (c): any other related matter ................................................................................ 70 14. Marine biosecurity .......................................................................................................................... 73 Relevant to ToR (c): any other related matter ................................................................................ 73 15. Biosecurity research ....................................................................................................................... 76 Relevant to ToR (c): any other related matter ................................................................................ 76 16. List of recommendations ................................................................................................................ 77 17. References ...................................................................................................................................... 80 2 Environmental Biosecurity Submission 74 1. INTRODUCTION • The Australian environment has suffered major losses
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4 Reproductive Biology of Cerambycids
    4 Reproductive Biology of Cerambycids Lawrence M. Hanks University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois Qiao Wang Massey University Palmerston North, New Zealand CONTENTS 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 133 4.2 Phenology of Adults ..................................................................................................................... 134 4.3 Diet of Adults ............................................................................................................................... 138 4.4 Location of Host Plants and Mates .............................................................................................. 138 4.5 Recognition of Mates ................................................................................................................... 140 4.6 Copulation .................................................................................................................................... 141 4.7 Larval Host Plants, Oviposition Behavior, and Larval Development .......................................... 142 4.8 Mating Strategy ............................................................................................................................ 144 4.9 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 148 Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Arhopalus Asperatus – a Common Longhorned Beetle
    Colorado Insect of Interest Arhopalus asperatus – A Common Longhorned Beetle Scientific Name: Arhopalus asperatus (LeConte) Order: Coleoptera (Beetles) Family: Cerambycidae (Longhorned Beetles) Identification and Descriptive Features: Arhopalus asperatus is a elongate-bodied longhorned beetle that is uniformly dark gray or brown. They can be moderately large but show considerable size variation, ranging from 18-33 mm in length. The antennae are about 1/2- 3/4 the body length and are longer in males. Larvae, type of roundheaded borer, are marked by a pair of Figure 1. Arhopalus asperatus. sharp spines that curve inward found on the hind segment of the body. Distribution in Colorado: Arhopalus asperatus appears to be widely distributed throughout the forested areas of the state. Life History and Habits: Arhopalus asperatus, along with the various “pine sawyers” (Monochamous spp.), are the most common longhorned beetles associated with recently dead or felled conifers. Most conifers, including most pines, firs, douglas-fir and spruce, are known hosts. Adult lay eggs in deep bark crevices. Larvae originally feed in the cambium, later moving to sapwood and heartwood where they pack the tunnels with coarse sawdust frass. Stumps and large roots are often the most common site of larval development. Development is thought to take 2-3 years to complete. Adults are attracted to recently scorched wood following forest fires. They also will often be seen around campfires. Related Species: Other Arhopalus species are known from Colorado. Museum records for A. rusticus montanus LeConte include El Paso, Jefferson, Boulder, Mesa, and Moffat counties, suggesting widespread distribution within Colorado. It is a lighter colored species than is A.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethanol and (–)-A-Pinene: Attractant Kairomones for Some Large Wood-Boring Beetles in Southeastern USA
    J Chem Ecol (2006) DOI 10.1007/s10886-006-9037-8 Ethanol and (–)-a-Pinene: Attractant Kairomones for Some Large Wood-Boring Beetles in Southeastern USA Daniel R. Miller Received: 12 September 2005 /Revised: 12 December 2005 /Accepted: 2 January 2006 # Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2006 Abstract Ethanol and a-pinene were tested as attractants for large wood-boring pine beetles in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina in 2002–2004. Multiple-funnel traps baited with (j)-a-pinene (released at about 2 g/d at 25–28-C) were attractive to the following Cerambycidae: Acanthocinus nodosus, A. obsoletus, Arhopalus rusticus nubilus, Asemum striatum, Monochamus titillator, Prionus pocularis, Xylotrechus integer, and X. sagittatus sagittatus. Buprestis lineata (Buprestidae), Alaus myops (Elateridae), and Hylobius pales and Pachylobius picivorus (Curculionidae) were also attracted to traps baited with (j)-a-pinene. In many locations, ethanol synergized attraction of the cerambycids Acanthocinus nodosus, A. obsoletus, Arhopalus r. nubilus, Monochamus titillator, and Xylotrechus s. sagittatus (but not Asemum striatum, Prionus pocularis,orXylotrechus integer)to traps baited with (j)-a-pinene. Similarly, attraction of Alaus myops, Hylobius pales, and Pachylobius picivorus (but not Buprestis lineata) to traps baited with (j)-a- pinene was synergized by ethanol. These results provide support for the use of traps baited with ethanol and (j)-a-pinene to detect and monitor common large wood- boring beetles from the southeastern region of the USA at ports-of-entry in other countries, as well as forested areas in the USA. Keywords Cerambycidae . Xylotrechus . Monochamus . Acanthocinus Curculionidae . Hylobius . Pachylobius . Elateridae . Alaus . Ethanol a-Pinene .
    [Show full text]
  • CERAMBYCIDAE of the WESTERN U.S.A. Version 061313 JAMES R
    SCREENING AID FOR THE CERAMBYCIDAE OF THE WESTERN U.S.A. Version 061313 JAMES R. LaBONTE1 STEVEN A. VALLEY1 JOSHUA VLACH1 CHRISTINE NIWA2 1OREGON DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 2U.S.D.A. FOREST SERVICE. Ret. Contributions and Acknowledgements James R. LaBonte, ODA (Oregon Department of Agriculture: Design and compilation of the screening aid. Steven A. Valley, ODA: Acquisition of most of the images. Thomas E. Valente, ODA: Acquisition of some of the images. Joshua J. Vlach, ODA. Design of screening aid, specimen preparation. Christine Niwa, USDA FS: Alpha testing of the screening aid and administration of the grant. ODA: Use of the imaging system, the entomology museum, and general support. USDA Forest Service for funding of this project and USDA APHIS for the acquisition of the imaging system. Introduction This screening aid is not a comprehensive treatment of western North American Cerambycidae (roundheaded or longhorned wood borers). It is designed to enable efficient sorting and identification of the most abundant species found in wood boring insect trap samples from surveys conducted by the ODA and the USDA FS in the Pacific Northwest and the West over the past ten years. Several exotic pest species are also included. *This aid will be most reliable in the conifer forest regions west of the Rocky Mountains. It may not function well with species found in the desert West and east of the Rockies. This screening aid is designed to be used by individuals with a wide range of taxonomic expertise. Images of all character states are provided. **It is not intended to operate completely independently of support by a taxonomist but with training, such as at a workshop.
    [Show full text]
  • Hüseyin Özdikmen* and Semra Turgut*
    _____________Mun. Ent. Zool. Vol. 1, No. 2, June 2006__________ 279 A ZOOGEOGRAPHICAL REVIEW OF SPONDYLIDINAE IN TURKEY (COLEOPTERA: CERAMBYCIDAE) Hüseyin Özdikmen* and Semra Turgut* * Gazi Üniversitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, Biyoloji Bölümü, 06500 Ankara, TÜRKİYE, e- mails: [email protected] and [email protected] [Özdikmen, H. & Turgut, S. 2006. A zoogeographical review of Spondylidinae in Turkey (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). Munis Entomology & Zoology 1 (2): 279-288] ABSTRACT: The taxa of Turkish Spondylidinae fauna that were recorded by various authors from different localities of Turkey are evaluated zoogeographically with the present paper. For this reason, the distribution patterns in Turkey and rest of the world for each taxon of related subfamily are determined. Also, chorotypes for each taxon are given in the parts of zoogeographical remarks. Key Words: Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Spondylidinae, Turkey, Zoogeography, Fauna The longhorn beetles or Cerambycidae are classified together with Chrysomelidae and Bruchidae in the superfamily Chrysomeloidea. But, some authors recognized Cerambycidae as a separate superfamily Cerambycoidea (Svacha & Danilevsky, 1986). Cerambycidae sensu stricto is divided into several subfamilies. These are Parandrinae, Prioninae, Lepturinae, Necydalinae, Spondylidinae, Apatophyseinae, Cerambycinae and Lamiinae. Parandrinae are not represented in Turkey. Moreover, the subfamilies Necydalinae and Apatophyseinae are represented only a few species in Turkey. The Turkish Spondylidinae fauna has not been
    [Show full text]
  • Cerambycidae of Tennessee
    Cerambycidae of Tennessee! Disteniinae: Disteniini! Parandrinae: Parandriini! Closed circles represent previously published county records, museum specimen records, and specimens examined. Open circles are county records reported in Jamerson (1973) for which a specimen could not be located. Future collections are needed to substantiate these accounts. Fig. 2. Elytrimitatrix (Elytrimitatrix) undata (F.)! Fig. 3. Neandra brunnea (F.)! Prioninae: Macrotomini! Prioninae: Meroscheliscini! Fig. 4. Archodontes melanoplus melanoplus (L.)! Fig. 5. Mallodon dasystomus dasystomus Say! Fig. 6. Tragosoma harrisii (LeConte)! Prioninae: Prionini! Fig. 7. Derobrachus brevicollis Audinet-Serville! Fig. 8. Orthosoma brunneum (Forster)! Fig. 9. Prionus (Neopolyarthron) imbricornis (L.)! Prioninae! : Solenopterini! Fig. 10. Prionus (Prionus) laticollis (Drury) ! Fig. 11. Prionus (Prionus) pocularis Dalman ! Fig. 12. Sphenosethus taslei (Buquet) ! Necydalinae: Necydalini! Spondylidinae: Asemini! Fig. 13. Necydalis melitta (Say)! Fig. 14. Arhopalus foveicollis (Haldeman)! Fig. 15. Arhopalus rusticus obsoletus (Randall)! ! ! Suppl. Figs. 2-15. Tennessee county collection localities for longhorned beetle (Cerambycidae) species: Disteniinae, Parandrinae, Prioninae, Necydalinae, Spondylinae: Asemini (in part). ! Spondylidinae: Asemini (ctd.)! Fig. 16. Asemum striatum (L.)! Fig. 17. Tetropium schwarzianum Casey! Fig. 18. Atimia confusa confusa (Say)! ! Spondylidinae: Saphanini! Lepturinae: Desmocerini! Lepturinae: Encyclopini! Fig. 19. Michthisoma heterodoxum LeConte
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Chemical Ecology of Cerambycids
    5 Chemical Ecology of Cerambycids Jocelyn G. Millar University of California Riverside, California Lawrence M. Hanks University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois CONTENTS 5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 161 5.2 Use of Pheromones in Cerambycid Reproduction ....................................................................... 162 5.3 Volatile Pheromones from the Various Subfamilies .................................................................... 173 5.3.1 Subfamily Cerambycinae ................................................................................................ 173 5.3.2 Subfamily Lamiinae ........................................................................................................ 176 5.3.3 Subfamily Spondylidinae ................................................................................................ 178 5.3.4 Subfamily Prioninae ........................................................................................................ 178 5.3.5 Subfamily Lepturinae ...................................................................................................... 179 5.4 Contact Pheromones ..................................................................................................................... 179 5.5 Trail Pheromones ......................................................................................................................... 182 5.6 Mechanisms for
    [Show full text]
  • A Check-List and Keys to the Primitive Sub-Families of Cerambycidae of Illinois
    Eastern Illinois University The Keep Masters Theses Student Theses & Publications 1967 A Check-list and Keys to the Primitive Sub-families of Cerambycidae of Illinois Michael Jon Corn Eastern Illinois University This research is a product of the graduate program in Zoology at Eastern Illinois University. Find out more about the program. Recommended Citation Corn, Michael Jon, "A Check-list and Keys to the Primitive Sub-families of Cerambycidae of Illinois" (1967). Masters Theses. 2490. https://thekeep.eiu.edu/theses/2490 This is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Theses & Publications at The Keep. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of The Keep. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A CHECK-LIST AND KEYS TO THE PRIMITIVE SUBFAMILIES OF CEHAMBYCIDAE OF ILLINOIS (TITLE) BY MICHAEL JON CORN B.S. in Ed., Eastern Illinois University, 1966 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master of Science IN THE GRADUATE SCHOOL, EASTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY CHARLESTON, ILLINOIS 1967 YEAR I HEREBY RECOMMEND THIS THESIS BE ACCEPTED AS FULFILLING THIS PART OF THE GRADUATE DEGREE CITED ABOVE 21 rl.\I\( l'i "1 PATE ADVISER DEPARTMENT HEAD ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to thank Dr. Michael A. Goodrich for.his advice and guidance during the research and writing of this paper. The author is also indebted to the following curators of the various museums and private individuals from whom material was borrowed: Mr. John K. Bouseman; Dr. Rupert Wenzel and Dr. Henry Dybas, Field Museum ,...-._, of Natural History; Dr.'M.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Richness and Phenology of Cerambycid Beetles in Urban Forest Fragments of Northern Delaware
    ECOLOGY AND POPULATION BIOLOGY Species Richness and Phenology of Cerambycid Beetles in Urban Forest Fragments of Northern Delaware 1 1,2 3 4 5 K. HANDLEY, J. HOUGH-GOLDSTEIN, L. M. HANKS, J. G. MILLAR, AND V. D’AMICO Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 1–12 (2015); DOI: 10.1093/aesa/sav005 ABSTRACT Cerambycid beetles are abundant and diverse in forests, but much about their host rela- tionships and adult behavior remains unknown. Generic blends of synthetic pheromones were used as lures in traps, to assess the species richness, and phenology of cerambycids in forest fragments in north- ern Delaware. More than 15,000 cerambycid beetles of 69 species were trapped over 2 yr. Activity periods were similar to those found in previous studies, but many species were active 1–3 wk earlier in 2012 than in 2013, probably owing to warmer spring temperatures that year. In 2012, the blends were tested with and without ethanol, a host plant volatile produced by stressed trees. Of cerambycid species trapped in sufficient numbers for statistical analysis, ethanol synergized pheromone trap catches for seven species, but had no effect on attraction to pheromone for six species. One species was attracted only by ethanol. The generic pheromone blend, especially when combined with ethanol, was an effective tool for assessing the species richness and adult phenology of many cerambycid species, including nocturnal, crepuscular, and cryptic species that are otherwise difficult to find. KEY WORDS Cerambycidae, attractant, phenology, forest fragmentation Cerambycid beetles can be serious pests of forest trees long as those in Europe, almost half of the forests in the and wood products (Speight 1989, Solomon 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Monochamus Carolinensis) on Pinaceae and Use of Virtual Plant Walk Maps As a Tool for Teaching Plant Identification Courses
    Feeding preference of pine sawyer beetle (Monochamus carolinensis) on Pinaceae and use of virtual plant walk maps as a tool for teaching plant identification courses by Matthew Stephen Wilson B.S., Auburn University, 2006 M.S., Auburn University, 2010 AN ABSTRACT OF A DISSERTATION submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Horticulture and Natural Resources College of Agriculture KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY Manhattan, Kansas 2016 Abstract Feeding preference experiments with the pine sawyer beetle (Monochamus carolinensis Olivier) were conducted using eleven taxa of Pinaceae. One newly emerged adult beetle (≤ 24 hours) was placed into each feeding arena (n = 124) containing three or four shoots of current season's growth from different tree species (one shoot per species) for choice experiments. Beetles were allowed to feed for 48 (2011) or 72 (2012-2014) hours, at which point shoots were removed and data collected on feeding occurrence and percent feeding area. Augmented design analyses of feeding occurrence and percent feeding area of the eleven taxa did not indicate significant evidence for feeding preferences of the pine sawyer beetle on most taxa except for a higher preference for both scots (Pinus sylvestris L.) and eastern white (P. strobus L.) pines compared to deodar cedar [Cedrus deodara (Roxb. ex D. Don) G. Don]. The feeding preference experiments suggest that pine sawyer beetle may feed on a wide-range of Pinaceae taxa. Virtual plant walk maps were developed using a web-application for two semesters of an ornamental plant identification course (n = 87). The maps allowed students to revisit plants and information covered in lecture and laboratory sections at their own convenience, using either a computer or mobile device.
    [Show full text]
  • Logs and Chips of Eighteen Eucalypt Species from Australia
    United States Department of Agriculture Pest Risk Assessment Forest Service of the Importation Into Forest Products Laboratory the United States of General Technical Report Unprocessed Logs and FPL−GTR−137 Chips of Eighteen Eucalypt Species From Australia P. (=Tryphocaria) solida, P. tricuspis; Scolecobrotus westwoodi; Abstract Tessaromma undatum; Zygocera canosa], ghost moths and carpen- The unmitigated pest risk potential for the importation of unproc- terworms [Abantiades latipennis; Aenetus eximius, A. ligniveren, essed logs and chips of 18 species of eucalypts (Eucalyptus amyg- A. paradiseus; Zelotypia stacyi; Endoxyla cinereus (=Xyleutes dalina, E. cloeziana, E. delegatensis, E. diversicolor, E. dunnii, boisduvali), Endoxyla spp. (=Xyleutes spp.)], true powderpost E. globulus, E. grandis, E. nitens, E. obliqua, E. ovata, E. pilularis, beetles (Lyctus brunneus, L. costatus, L. discedens, L. parallelocol- E. regnans, E. saligna, E. sieberi, E. viminalis, Corymbia calo- lis; Minthea rugicollis), false powderpost or auger beetles (Bo- phylla, C. citriodora, and C. maculata) from Australia into the strychopsis jesuita; Mesoxylion collaris; Sinoxylon anale; Xylion United States was assessed by estimating the likelihood and conse- cylindricus; Xylobosca bispinosa; Xylodeleis obsipa, Xylopsocus quences of introduction of representative insects and pathogens of gibbicollis; Xylothrips religiosus; Xylotillus lindi), dampwood concern. Twenty-two individual pest risk assessments were pre- termite (Porotermes adamsoni), giant termite (Mastotermes dar- pared, fifteen dealing with insects and seven with pathogens. The winiensis), drywood termites (Neotermes insularis; Kalotermes selected organisms were representative examples of insects and rufinotum, K. banksiae; Ceratokalotermes spoliator; Glyptotermes pathogens found on foliage, on the bark, in the bark, and in the tuberculatus; Bifiditermes condonensis; Cryptotermes primus, wood of eucalypts. C.
    [Show full text]
  • Update on Spotted Lanternfly in Pennsylvania
    United States Department of Agriculture Shared Problems -- Shared Solutions Annapolis, MD | January 12-15, 2016 US Forest Service Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team FHTET-2016-09 December 2016 The abstracts were submitted in an electronic format and were edited to achieve only a uniform format and typeface. Each contributor is responsible for the accuracy and content of his or her own paper. Statements of the contributors from outside the U. S. Department of Agriculture may not necessarily reflect the policy of the Department. Some participants did not submit abstracts, and so their presentations are not represented here. Cover image and graphic: Melody Keena “Shared Problems – Shared Solutions”. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval by the U. S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable. CAUTION: Pesticide Precautionary Statement PESTICIDES References to pesticides appear in some technical papers represented by these abstracts. Publication of these statements does not constitute endorsement or recommendation of them by the conference sponsors, nor does it imply that uses discussed have been registered. Use of most pesticides is regulated by state and federal laws. Applicable registrations must be obtained from the appropriate regulatory agency prior to their use. CAUTION: Pesticides can be injurious to humans, domestic animals, desirable plants, and fish or other wildlife- -if they are not handled or applied properly. Use all pesticides selectively and carefully. Follow recommended practices for the disposal of surplus pesticides and pesticide containers.
    [Show full text]