HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport of the Village Forester 2/16/1982f- ,
REPORT OF THE VILLAGE FORESTER
February 16, 1982
C;psy Moth Problem
Survey of Village
A careful survey of 72 locations in the Village of Cayuga Heights for gypsy moth
egg masses indicates there are a few heavily infested areas (see attached map).
Mails on the location and maximum number of egg masses detected per tree are
listed in Table 1. Note this survey was not random; we sought out sites that
were ideal forest habitats for the gypsy moth and then only listed the maximum
number found on an individual tree.
Infested trees should be treated when they have the following number of egg masses:
2 egg masses per 5 inch diameter tree
5 egg masses per 12 inch diameter tree
10 egg masses per 24 inch diameter tree
These egg mass densities will probably result in significant but not complete
defoliation. Oaks and other decidious trees under normal moisture and nutrient
conditions can tolerate two complete, and sometimes up to three defoliations and
yet still survive. Note, after a defoliation, trees should be well fertilized and
watered for two years.
Pines and spruce trees differ from oaks and other decidious trees in their defolia-
tion tolerance. Although newly emerged caterpillars cannot survive on pines and
spruce, the older larvae move on to pines and spruce trees after defoliating sur-
rounding oaks and decidious trees. If caterpillars defoliate pines and spruce, there
is little chance that the pines will survive and no chance for the spruce.
History
Gypsy moths were brought into the United States in 1868 by a scientist who was in-
vestigating their potential to produce silk. The moths escaped from his laboratory
and the scientist warned the authorities concerning their potential danger; nothing
was done.
Life History of the Gypsy Moth
eggs hatch
T a
aci
egg stage
Ylemerrge, egg stage
2.
Control Methods
The two periods when the gypsy moth can be controlled are while it is in the egg
stage and during early May when the larvae or caterpillars are quite small. The
eggs can be scooped off into plastic bags or painted with creosote (egg masses 10
to 20 feet up can be painted by attaching the brush to a low -cost bamboo fishing
pole).
The caterpillars can be controlled with a biocontrol microorganism (Bacillus thurin-
giensis) [Btl or the insecticide Sevin. Bt has an advantage in that it causes fewer
environmental problems than insecticides. However, It is less effective and more
expensive than Sevin. The treatment of large trees with either Bt or Sevin required
special spray equipment, which the homeowner usually does not have.
Control Plan for 1982
The goal in all pest management programs is to control the pest while using the least
amount of pesticide or other control agent. Not only is this approach less costly,
but most important it helps minimize environmental and health hazards.
At this time, I recommend against spraying the total Village area by aircraft for
several reasons:
(1) The gypsy moth infestation is serious in only a few areas.
(2) There are hazards to the environment and public health from aircraft insecticide
-spraying. Cnly about 70% of the insecticide applied by aircraft lands in the
target area, the remainder drifts away and is eventually deposited in other
ecosystems.
(3) Some Villagers may not want to be sprayed. My understanding of the law in
New York is that after a hearing if a person notifies the Village in writing
that he /she does not want their property sprayed then it must not be treated.
If the property is treated by mistake, there is the possibility of a lawsuit.
(4) Gypsy moth populations are normally (90% of the time) kept under effective
control by about 100 natural enemies that include beneficial insects, birds,
and mice. Insecticide spraying will reduce the numbers and effectiveness of .
many of the natural enemies of the gypsy moth. This may, therefore, prolong
the infestation by not allowing these beneficial control agents to increase
their numbers to bring the moth under control.
With the current gypsy moth situation in which the serious infestations are limited
to a few locations in the Village, our approach should be to restrict insecticide
treatment primarily to those infestations. 1 propose the following plan:
,• 3.
(1) The Village should treat its trees (primarily oaks and willows) in the
infested areas. Homeowners in infested areas should be warned about the
infestation and be encouraged to treat their susceptible trees.
(2) The Village Forester should survey all trees not already surveyed to deter-
mine those that require treatment.
(3) All homeowners should be encouraged to check their trees for egg masses, and
they should be encouraged to treat their trees with serious infestations.
(4) The Forester should be available to consult with homeowners if they need advice.
The proposed program of "spot treatment" for the gypsy moth would protect as many of
the natural enemies as possible while still protecting those trees that are under
threat. Other benefits of this approach include keeping environmental and health
risks to a minimum as well as keeping economic costs of gypsy moth control low.
Dutch Elm Disease
The Dutch Elm Disease problem remains but is now causing only minimal losses because
only a few elms remain in the Village, and the intensity of the infestation has been
low. This year only 4 diseased elm trees had to be removed.
Respectfully submitted,
David Pimentel
Village Forester
r
Table 1. Survey of gypsy moth egg masses on trees in the Village of Cayuga Heights
during winter of 1982. (See map).
Site Max. Number of Control
4umber Location Egg Masses /Indiv.Tree Suggestion
1
Cemetery on Pleasant Grove Rd.
91
+
2
Burleigh & Winthrop
1
-
3
205 Winthrop Drive
17
+
4
301 & 305 Winthrop Drive
0
-
5
107 Simsbury andlottsrom Texas La.
adjoining
23
+
6
2 Winthrop Place
18
+
7
106 Texas Cane
3
-
8
1018 Triphammer Rd.
33+
+
9
4 Triphammer Lane
6
-
10.
111 Sheldon Road
2
_
11
503 Triphammer Road
100+
+
12
7 Pleasant Grove Road
40+
+
13
128 Sheldon Road
33+
+
14
Village Barn
26+
+
15
717, 721, 803 Triphammer Road
3
-
16
512 Highland Road
1
-
17
425 Hanshaw Road
4
_
18
201 Hampton Road
3
_
19
108 Highgate Road
1
-
20
5 Highland Park Lane
30+
+
21
316 Comstock Road
3
-
22
307 Forest Drive
2
-
23
200 Oak Hill Road
3
-
24
118 Oak Hill Road
2
_
25
119 Oak Hill Road
22
+
26
401 Highland Road
7*
+
27
101 White Park Road
0
-
28
316 Highland Apts. Inc.
9
-
29
420 Kline Road
26
+
30
308 Kline Road
70+
+
31
106 Cayuga hgts. Road
10
+
32
108 Sunset Drive
4
-
33
Sunset' Park
10
+
34
End Sunset Drive (Park)
7
_
35
105 Devon Road
100+
+
* These egg masses were
present on a relatively small tree.
Table
Site
Number
1. (cont'd)
Location
Max. Number of
Egg Masses /Indiv.Tree
• l
` ' 2
Control
Suggestion
36
205 Devon Road
25
+
37
1 Strawberry Lane & neighboring lots
30+
+
38
115 Sunset Drive
59+
+
39
140 N. Sunset Drive
14+
+
40
205 N. Sunset Drive
33+
+
41
628 Cayuga Hgts. Rd.
3
-
42
210 Highgate Road
0
-
43
403 Highgate Road
0
-
44
1060 Highland Road
0
-
45
102 Highgate Place
1
-
46
1001 Highland Road
0
-
47
235 Berkshire Road
1
-
48
540 Cayuga Hgts. Road
31+
+
49
505 The Parkway
2
-
50
School on The Parkway
2
-
51
School on E. Upland Road
17
+
52
109 W. Upland Road
13
+
53
416 Cayuga Heights Road
100+
+
54
1001 Hanshaw Road
14
+
55
840 Hanshaw Road
0
-
56
412 E. Upland Road
3
-
57
317 E. Upland Road
1
-
58
203 The Parkway
2
-
59
109 Iroquois Road
75+
+
60
110 Hanshaw Road
21+
+
61
617 Highland Road
14
+
62
706 Hanshaw Road
0
-
63
420 Hanshaw Road
0
-
64
424 Hanshaw Road
30+
+
65
615 Highland Road
50+
+
66
147 N. Sunset Drive
1
-
67
145 N. Sunset Drive
1
-
68
Country Club
42
+
69
Country Club
1
-
70
David Thomas on Remington Rd.
1
-
71
Blood Estates on Remington Rd. -
Village Tree
12
+
�1
--
'° 4 t VILLAGE LINE
\ ta'or HIGH NO. rt i
T•1� 2 act YAAI::L'N SUI:9ER OF GYPSY :!0'TH xC !1.15SE7 �
1 41 0
44 PER INDIVIDUAL TAS° AT EACH SAMFLE a'ITE x n
` o ¢ a
R.
0 to 9 SG HA59^_3 p
l\ z a
0
z 46 \— IO to 25 3CC MASSES bsr 3 2
o '\ C J EMty \ Z
Hoa•
'yo p p z u O_ 26 or HORE Dpi PASSES i 6 �oLiiA
O40
v :
TON = hVY9TA INDICATES SITE LOCATION (TABLE 1) 3
= s�MS 1 oa.
19 {y t962 —5
>\ c O 7 z p4m "r a° \ / M T K� RO4
5 : 7 ro v 22 55
49 0
G4 r� w000s
n c 3� 04 o,A X61 a f �L,tNE
0 C N a ;_ O ¢ ¢ 8
�%` r °Q '4 `�SN4W ti
N. LIMC OF City J 6 \ ' 9 ` °�y P O
TOWN OF ITHACA N • 71 ?° 5%
N W z A v vr0
z
yW5 k _) 5
Y W i Oa Fs j
J
72 72 f4s' SNEL
A,, s• n ( I \ \\ . a `AY 4Nn aOPO o OON R040
I L° m dp 58 °°° 15 69
,< Of' b OUOIS I4' Qv
ZONING MAP oss� b >>i .::•':' '_.. ':�}.,.
CAYUGA HEIGHTS G", 4 3 Q X27 ��P'a� Ro.''' `:i
VILLAGE �= 1`'' = F° z6 ��� -- V`
J t p2C,j 8040 oP co Ry `CLO 00 ,
JAN. 15,1973
o Soo' low, -wo :000• 33 ' \� bd,•. - •e: .I `\
72 p. �y 8�6 p.•
LEGEND jco� C1•p : �Q 9
G RESIDENCE DISTRICT
C� MULTIPLE HOUSING DISTRICT IRO JE,SSUP, jfO.•
I= COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 3)• a .moo E � o< <TA •`
'( VILLAGE LINE .� ....
r aIi'�
CITY OF ITHACA