HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05012007 - SD.3 i
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS .r ........ o�
Contra
FROM: Edward P. M4r g cultural Commissioner-
Director of Weights and Measures °`, "�" Costa
DATE: May 1, 2007 OST4.COl1Tz County
SUBJECT: 2006 Annual Crop Report S
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION(S):
Accept the 2006• Annual Crop Report submitted by the County
Agricultural Commissioner.
BACKGROUND:
Sections 2272 (a) and 2279 of the California Food and Agricultural
Code require the County Agricultural Commissioner to submit an
annual report to the State Secretary of Agriculture, regarding the
condition, acreage, production, and value of agricultural products
in the county. An annual report shall also include what is being
done to eradicate, control , or manage pests and actions relating
to the exclusion of pests and quarantine against pests . The report
may also include information about organic farming, biotechnology,
integrated pest management and biological control activities in
the county.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _V--YES -- SIGNATURE:
2 /_ ---- -
-------------------------------------------------- ----------------------
�/RFCOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMI EE
*/APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
-------------------------- - -- ----- -------
;;74
----------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------
ACTION OF BOA ON APPROVE AS RECOMMENDEDOTFItR
VOT OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE
AYES: NOES: SHOWN.
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: / �f
ATTESTED [ cw
JOHN SW EN, ERK OF THE BOARD
OF SUPER ISORS AND COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR
CC: County Administrator
Dept.of Agriculture
BY bL ,
DEPUTY
.:' �] �� � PSA •�
r ,
7 `
' LL
It
f,.., 'al;^—•{,.,+pit}(�5A� 1�•• t!t R�. r _�1 'NRS ', `R$.`�.1 I„r, _,r 1'•' Y- Y
��"^. , ''� 3w. tv�%., ,1'r ^"i,- '[\• i�/\c-V+)\l �4`�'"' i >..Rr �, G, 'moo y,.i f.,,,t
�;'�'f dl: y�,�"`"' s ! /y''r�r}'i ((/�J� ''R•-��,\5{ �.� - 'Y{"�M� y.rte.. "�'
00,
43ZMc ri h�j `ti
1 4-
{ Y yip f
{
j ; ,�..+r"'""" E "� , 3. a ink `�* �'� ��,�,c�� ,�`fir •�,,,...I
F
r
De artment of Agriculture Edward P.Meyer
P 9
2366 A Stanwell Circle Contra Agricultural Commissioner
Concord,California 94520-4807 Director of Weights and Measures
(925)646-5250 Costa
FAX(925)646-5732
Branch Office County
Knightsen Farm Center sever
Delta Road @ Second Street
P.O.Box 241
Knightsen,CA 94548 �/J1
(925)427-8610
FAX(925)427-8612
Y
Y,q COLIK�
To: A. G. KAWAMURA, SECRETARY
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE
and
THE HONORABLE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
I am pleased to submit the 2006 Annual Crop and Livestock Report for Contra Costa County in accordance with the
provisions of Section 2279 and 2272 of the California Food and Agricultural Code. This report includes information on
Organic Farming and Biological Control activities in our county.
The total gross value of agricultural crops and products in 2006 was$83,426,000, down $3,512,420 dollars from 2005.
Bedding Plant and Vegetable Plant values declined sharply as major west county growers reduced their operations. Also,
our last major cut flower grower closed his doors in 2005. As a result, we have lost Cut Flowers as a separate category in
this year's crop report. The Cut Flower industry was mentioned in the very first Contra Costa County crop report in 1939
and has been a separately reported category for the last forty-seven years, first appearing in the crop report of 1959.
Wheat acreage increased due to better prices. Fresh market tomato acreage decreased sharply as some growers chose
not to replant fields in tomatoes in 2006 after losses in 2005. The remaining fresh market tomato growers tended to sell their
tomatoes more directly to consumers, leading to major increases in price. Processing tomatoes grown in the Brentwood
area received premium prices from packing sheds due to their high quality. Apricot prices improved due to demand on a
light crop in 2006. The Apple category value slipped below$1 million as acreage and price continued to decrease due
to competition from foreign markets. Grape prices continued to decrease due to lower demand from wineries that had a
large existing wine inventory. Both nectarines and peaches suffered decreases in yield due to late rains. Some walnut
orchards suffering from blackline disease were removed in 2006. The result was to decrease our overall acreage, however,
the remaining acreage reflected increased quality and achieved a higher average price.
Several crop categories exceeded $1 million in value. These categories in decreasing order include cattle and calves,
bedding plants, sweet corn, grapes, tomatoes, rangeland pasture, miscellaneous vegetables, field corn, alfalfa, cherries,
apricots, miscellaneous nursery, herbaceous perennials, walnuts, indoor decoratives, and beans.
It should be emphasized the values stated in this report are gross receipts and do not include the cost of production,
transportation, or marketing of the products. The economic benefit of agricultural production is generally thought to be
about three times the gross production value.
I wish to thank the many individuals and organizations who supplied us with the information to complete this report.
Their cooperation is truly appreciated. I also would like to thank Nancy Niemeyer and the rest of my staff for their diligent
work in obtaining, compiling, and coordinating their efforts to put together our annual report.
Respectfully submitted,
Edward P.Meyer
Agricultural Commissioner
1
Contra Costa County
Department of Agriculture/
Weights & Measures
Agricultural Commissioner - Director of Weights & Measures
Edward P. Meyer
_Chief Deputy Agricultural Commissioner/Sealer
Vince Guise
Deputy Agricultural Commissioner
Cathleen M. Roybal Larry Yost Joe Deviney
Deputy Sealer of Weights & Measures
Patrick J. Roof
Agricultural Biologist/Weights & Measures Inspector III
Ann McClure Patty Whitlock Ralph Fonseca
Gil Rocha Nancy Niemeyer Beth Slate
Jorge Vargas Arthur Mangonon Steve Reymann
Gene Mangini Cecilie Siegel-Sebolt
Agricultural Biologist II
Matthew Slattengren Abdoulaye Niang
Weights & Measures Inspector II
Ngozi Egbuna
Agricultural Biologist I
Chris deNijs Kathryn Wright Mariah Slusser
Weights & Measures Trainee
Keely Kirkman Patrick Bowen
Administrative Support
Executive Secretary Clerk
Susan Finley Roxann Crosby
On the Cover: Contra Costa County's new canine quarantine detection teams:
Cecilie Siegel-Sebolt and Bella (left), Mariah S/usser and Bart (right).
3
The cover of this year's crop report features Bella and Bart, detection dogs working in Contra
Costa County as part of a USDA pilot program to help prevent the introduction of exotic pests. California
agriculture is an industry that grossed over 38 billion dollars in 2005 and exported over 9 billion dollars
worth of commodities to foreign countries. The industry generates an estimated 100 billion dollars
more in related economic activity that provides jobs for our state. Infestations of exotic plant pests and
diseases could cause huge losses to agriculture and our economy, directly through crop damage and
indirectly through the loss of our export markets. Exotic pests also harm our natural environment by
infesting, preying on, or competing with desired and native species. Bella and Bart play an important
role in efforts to exclude exotic pests and protect our quality of life. `
There are many different ways exotic pests can enter the state. California has major shipping
ports, airports, railroad lines, and a border with Mexico. During holiday seasons such as Christmas or
on special occasions such as Valentines Day and Mother's Day, package delivery services process large
numbers of shipments containing wreaths, flowers, fruit, and plants from all over the world. Also,
California is the nation's most populated and ethnically diverse state. People may visit relatives or
friends in California and bring gifts from their native countries or give their loved ones a taste of home
by mailing fruit and vegetables to them. In some cases these gifts also bring unwanted pests that have
hitchhiked to our country.
d ,
r
a
A shipment marked as electronics contained a flower lei from Tahiti with harmful live exotic insect pests.
To help prevent exotic pest infestations, both California and the Federal government have plant
quarantine laws to help prevent the delivery of potentially infested shipments of fruit, vegetables,
flowers, and other plant material. Federal quarantine officers check cargo coming into California
through international ports of entry and County Biologists inspect local shipping points. In 2006,
Contra Costa County Biologists performed over 60,000 exclusion inspections at UPS, Fed Ex, and mail
centers and wrote over 350 quarantine rejections. During various quarantine inspections in Contra
Costa County in 2006, 137 seriously harmful A and Q rated pests were intercepted.
One of California's quarantine laws requires that any shipment with plant material such as fruit,
vegetables, nursery stock, bulbs, roots, seeds, flowers, etc., must be clearly marked with the type of
plant material it contains and where it was grown. This allows Biologists to determine whether the
plant material might have pests that could endanger California agriculture. Unfortunately, when a
package is not marked, the Biologist might not know that there is plant material inside it. Shipments
4
f r
1
Plant material shipped to businesses and private individuals may be inspected by County Biologists.
may lack markings because the shipper has left them off accidentally, is ignorant of California's quarantine
requirements, or is intentionally trying to get prohibited items delivered undetected. These unmarked
shipments pose the greatest threat of containing unwanted pests. That's where Bella and Bart can
help.
A dog has an extremely keen sense of smell and can easily tell if there is any sort of plant material
inside a package. Dog's noses are designed to trap and identify even faint odors. They have over 200
million scent receptors compared to a mere 5 million possessed by humans. Not only can dogs detect
scents, but they can be trained to distinguish and remember many different ones. Some dogs have
been known to recognize nearly 50 odors. Dogs working with a human partner can accurately inspect
a large number of packages in a very short amount of time and can sniff out shipments containing plant
material at about a 90 percent success rate.
The idea of using dogs for plant pest detections is not new. In 1984, the first U.S. agriculture
detector dog program began with one team consisting of beagle and handlerat LosAngeles International
Airport. Now there are more than 65 teams working at 21 international airports throughout the nation.
Around 1987, The U.S. Department of Agriculture-Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA-
APHIS) opened three regional canine training centers which were later combined into one national
training center in Florida. In 1999, APHIS expanded its detector dog program to check vehicles and
baggage coming over the borders from Mexico and Canada. In 2003, the APHIS agriculture detector
dog program became a part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
M +�
F
t
White Peach Scale. Giant Dodder White-footed Ant
5.
In addition to their quarantine work,agriculture detector dog teams help raise public awareness of
the importance of agriculture in the United States and remind people about our quarantine restrictions.
They are highly visible to passengers and shippers during their inspections at international airports.
The teams also perform public outreach by giving demonstrations to audiences of all ages.The program
has been recognized by the Port Authorities of New York and New Jersey for providing outstanding
customer service and has been inducted into the National Dog Museum Hall of Fame. '
The USDA National Detector Dog Training Center in Orlando, Florida is internationally recognized
and has been used as a model for many countries who want to start their own detector.dog programs.
Countries that have consulted with experts from the center include Australia, New Zealand, Mexico,
Canada, Guatemala, and South Korea. At the center, dogs are trained to find plant material or a
variety of other targets such as drugs, explosives, meat, live animals, search and rescue victims, etc.
For example, detector dogs from the center are used by the U.S. Wildlife Service to find Brown Tree
Snakes in aircraft and ships leaving Guam. This species of snake has caused the extinction of several
native bird species in Guam and has endangered many more. To protect the native species in Hawaii
and other islands, it is important not to allow this pest to spread any further.
Candidates for detector dog training are selected from a variety of sources, but most are from
local animal shelters. Bella was a "dropout" from a Canine Companions for Independence breeding
program because she was too active for their purposes. Bart is a "reformed" chicken chaser who
was turned in to the ASPCA. He still has buckshot in his rear due to his youthful exploits. Before any
dogs are accepted into the training program, they are evaluated for temperament, suitability, and
good health. The dogs must be between one to three years old, energetic, friendly, highly motivated
for food, attentive, agile, and able to work around distractions. Dogs that have been accepted into
training will never be returned to an animal shelter, even if they drop out of the program. The dogs
generally work until they are seven or eight years old, depending their performance and continued
motivation. They are often adopted by their handlers when they retire. If the handler cannot take
them, a good home will be found for the dog.
The dogs and their human partners go through training together at the USDA National
Detector Dog Training Center for 8 - 12 weeks. Trainers begin by teaching the dogs to paw (or for
l
} `I
f
C Box
During training, Bella practiced working on a conveyor belt and in a delivery truck.
6
baggage inspection, sit next to) any packages containing the odors of citrus, apple, mango, guava, or
stone fruit. The dogs will learn the odors of other types of plant material later during their on-the-job
training. During training, the dog teams will practice working in and around storage areas, conveyor
1 belts, and delivery trucks. The dog must learn to understand what the handler wants and the handler
must learn to understand the dog's signals. Each time the dogs successfully find a package that has
plant material, they receive a food reward. They are given frequent rest breaks and rewards to keep
them focused and interested in the work. Dogs must be attentive and excited about the work and be
happy on and off the job to be successful. For them, work is fun and full of love and rewards. Handlers
develop a close and caring relationship with their canine partner and are sensitive to the dog's behavior
and health.
Detector dogs are working dogs, not pets. Because of their sensitivity to food and food odors,
they can not live in the house. The dogs must stay in a secure, temperature controlled kennel when
not under the direct control of the handler and are fed a special balanced diet that does not include
human-type food. Only the handler may correct the dog's behavior or give commands and treats. The
dogs are carefully monitored and receive complete veterinary care and health exams. Exposure to
other dogs is limited to protect them from contagious diseases and injury.
The first few months on the job are a transitional period for the team as the dogs become
familiar with their new living and working environments. They visit the package delivery companies
regularly, first when the facilities are not busy, then later, during package sorting and loading. The
dogs learn the scents of other target items such as nursery plants, flowers, bulbs, seeds, roots, and a
large variety of fruits and vegetables. They also learn to ignore distractions in their workplace and to
disregard non-target items such as candy or baked goods. Their work endurance increases and they
become more focused. The handler gives the dog refresher training at least once a week or more often
as needed. Generally, after about six months, the team will be able to work at or near peak efficiency.
At the end of the training period, the team must pass a proficiency test in order to become certified by
the USDA.
F,>
This box was marked as plates. Bart indicated it contained plant material and found mandarins.
Once an agriculture detector dog team has completed training and is working in the field, they
receive periodic assessments and refresher training by USDA National Detector Dog Training Center
regional managers. Each team is monitored on site at least once a year to ensure they meet established
national procedures. The manager will provide any technical advice and help that may be needed
and check that the dog is receiving proper housing and veterinary care. The manager will also
7
determine if and when a dog needs to be retired due to temperament changes, health concerns, or
old age.
Starting in 1996, the California Department of Food and Agriculture established a dog detector
program consisting of 12 teams. The program proved to be very successful at finding plant material
in incoming packages and was far more efficient than inspections done by a human alone. However,
during a financial crisis in 2001, budget cuts caused the program to be shut down. The California
County Agricultural Commissioners believed there was still a serious need for the program and have
made several attempts to get the state or Federal government to reinstate it. Federal funding was
approved to begin a pilot program in 2006 with a three year commitment.
Currently, Contra Costa and San Bernardino counties have started detector dog team programs.
San Bernardino County has one team working facilities in their county. Contra Costa County has two
teams that will be performing inspections in Contra Costa and other Bay Area counties. If the program
is successful, more dog teams in other counties may be added. The Contra Costa and San Bernardino
handlers went to the USDA National Detector Dog Training Center in September 2006 and began their
on-the-job training in December 2006. The teams will become USDA certified canine handlers once
they complete their training and pass their final tests.
The teams are inspecting packages on trucks, conveyer belts, and holding areas at UPS, Fed-Ex,
DHL, and potentially may work at airports, and other ports of commerce. They work when packages
are sorted and loaded onto delivery trucks in the late night or early morning hours.
Although they are still considered to be in training, Bella and Bart have already intercepted a
number of unmarked shipments that were in violation of State and Federal quarantines. Due to the
attention the detection dogs bring to our quarantine requirements, we have also seen that shipping
facility staff have dramatically improved their compliance with the requirement to hold plant material
for inspection by County Biologists.
O Agriculture
Ive Department
Quarantine Hold
Canine
Program
A hold tag used by the dog detector teams. One of many California crops at risk.
8
Field Crops
Production Value
Crop Year Harvested Per Per
Acreage Acre Total Unit Unit Total
Field Corn 2006 5,690 3.96 22,500 Ton 110.00 2,475,000
2005 5,440 4.26 23,200 Ton 98.20 2,278,000
.Hay
Alfalfa 2006 3,310 4.73 15,700 Ton 121.00 1,900,000
2005 3,280 5.50 18,000 Ton 125.00 2,250,000
Grain 2006 1,580 2.76 4,360 Ton 58.50 255,000
2005 1,570 2.42 3,800 Ton 77.30 294,000
Pasture
Irrigated 2006 7,360 Acre 120.00 883,000
2005 5,960 Acre 100.00 596,000
Rangeland 2006 169,000 Acre 20.00 3,380,000
2005 169,000 Acre 22.50 3,803,000
Safflower 2006 726 1.18 857 Ton 251.00 215,000
2005 822 1.05 863 Ton 237.00 205,000
Wheat 2006 2,520 1.94 4,890 Ton 121.00 592,000
2005 1,530 1.99 3,040 Ton 112.00 340,000
Miscellaneous 2006 1,810 472,000
Field Crops* 2005 2,120 505,000
Total 2006 191,996 $10,172,000
2005 189,722 $10,271,000
* Barley, Forage Hay, Hay (Wild), Rye, Silage, Straw, Sudan Grass
9
Vl.�- 7�,
Ali
..kAA
EA
.c�
i4 ✓ �7I i r 4}/ Y Kt V M ]
71
10
11• • • 1 1 • 1' 1 11 1 1 111
11 1 1 • ••. 11 111
• • 11• • • • • 1 11 fell
11 •: 1 • � • 11 1111
• 11. • • 111 11
11 • • • :1 11 • 11
• 11. 1 • : : 11 • 11 1 111
11 1 1 1 •11 • 1 11 • 111
• 11• 11 • •1: • � : 111
11 . 1 • 1/ 111
11• � 1 1 •1: • 1 11 : • � 111
11 1 � 11 � 1 • 11 1. • 111
see a
• . 11• � .1 � • 1 . 11 • .1 • � � 111
11 1: 1 � 1 � 11 • 1 � 111
- • 11• : •. 111
- • - . . - 11 1 � •. 111
11 . • � : • 1 11
• - - • -- - • ' - • •- '• •- •
1
Fruit &
Nut Crops
Production Value
Crop Year Harvested Per Per
Acreage Acre Total Unit Unit Total
Apples 2006 262 7.00 1,830 Ton 490.00 897,000
2005 304 8.12 2,470 Ton 590.00 1,457,000
Apricots
Total 2006 519 6.63 3,738 Ton 1,714,000
2005 542 6.82 3,696 Ton 1,295,000
Fresh 2006 238 Ton 2,790.00 664,000
2005 196 Ton 1,250.00 245,000
Processing 2006 3,500 Ton 300.00 1,050,000
2005 3,500 Ton 300.00 1,050,000
Cherries 2006 364 1.41 513 Ton 3,180.00 1,631,000
2005 334 1.49- 498 Ton 2,870.00 1,429,000
Grapes 2006 1,940 4.42 8,570 Ton 771.00 6,607,000
2005 1,940 4.58 8,890 Ton 889.00 7,903,000
Nectarines 2006 39 2.57 100 Ton 3,190.00 319,000
2005 39 3.73 145 Ton 2,680.00 389,000
Peaches 2006 157 3.07 482 Ton 1,270.00 612,000
2005 164 4.46 731 Ton 1,690.00 1,235,000
Plums 2006 37 2.12 78 Ton 2,960.00 231,000
2005 33 2.67 88 Ton 1,830.00 161,000
Walnuts 2006 513 1.78 913 Ton 1,420.00 1,296,000
2005 723 2.06 1,490 Ton 1,290.00 1,922,000
Miscellaneous 2006 164 699,000
Fruit & Nut Crops* 2005 151 652,000
Total 2006 3,995 $14,006,000
2005 4,230 $16,443,000
*Almonds, Asian Pears, Berries, Citrus, Figs, Melons, Olives, Pears, Pecans, Persimmons,
Pistachios, Pluots, Prunes, Pomegranates, Quinces, Strawberries
11
Y
"'r a r J , ff. 8�., r n Yy �.-•,y,,,',-,_3-,.�5 tom`
�'; w _✓ 4..� Z~.y�i5. � arm-,t} it r*�r t ,�
`714
ti
E*:' _�E~.����s���.a._..1 � rr ,a z�, •��y��w t"'' r`N'--c"rh.",°.T� '��''�s`
• • •
- • • 11• � � 111 dl 1 1 111
11 � 111 � 1 •1 • � : 1 111
- • _ - • 11• 111 � 1 111
11 : : 111 • 1 • 111
• • • 11• 111 1 1 : 111
- • 11 : 1 111 1 1 : : 111
- • - • - /1• 1 � 11 111
11 1 � 11 : 111
• • 11• 111 1 • 111
• • 11 111 � 1 111
• _ 11• • : 111 : • • 1 ' � • 111
1 1 1 1 1 • ' � • � � 1 1 1
7
I
Livestock
Production Value
Item Year No. of Total Per
Head Liveweight Unit Unit Total
Cattle & Calves 2006 25,800 194,000 Cwt 92.30 17,906,000
2005 16,500 122,000 Cwt 92.70 11,309,000
Value
Item Year Production Per
Unit Unit Total
Honey 2006 40,000 Lbs. 6.00 240,000
2005 40,000 Lbs. 4.00 160,000
Beeswax 2006 300 Lbs. 4.00 1,200
2005 180 Lbs. 4.00 720
Pollination 2006 500 Colonies 140.00 70,000
2005 500 Colonies 100.00 50,000
Miscellaneous 2006 500,000
Livestock and 2005 500,000
Livestock Products*
Total 2006 $18,717,200
2005 $12,019,720
* Chickens, Ducks, Emus, Goats, Hogs, Llamas, Ostriches, Pigs, Rabbits, Sheep, Turkeys,
Milk, Wool, Eggs, Pollen
13
Recapitulation
Gross Value/Million Dollars Ranking
Category 2006 2005 2006 2005
Vegetable & Seed Crops 22.0 23.6 1 2
Livestock 18.7 12.0 2 4
Nursery Products 18.5 24.6 3 1
Fruit & Nut Crops 14.0 16.4 4 3
Field Crops 10.2 10.3 5 5
Gross Value Change
Category 2006 2005
Field Crops 10,172,000 10,271,000 -99,000
Vegetable & Seed Crops 22,033,800 23,560,700 -1,526,900
Fruit & Nut Crops 14,006,000 16,443,000 -2,437,000
Nursery Crops 18,497,000 24,644,000 -6,147,000
Livestock 18,717,200 12,019,720 6;697,480
Total $83,426,000 $86,938,420 -3,512,420
Total Acres in County 482,000
Population in County January 2006 1,029,377
Land in Farms -Acres (2002 Census) 126,338
Harvested Cropland -Acres (2002 Census) 26,018
N
Organic Farmingo X 0 M U
.1
•L
00 0
•41 i U M M r 3 U. CD IM I L
C. t G) CD d 3 7 &_ d �E 3 d d d �
Q v 0 z a a. z a U. z O cn > > > z
No. of Farms 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3
Estimated Acres 18.0 11.5 1.3 14.5 34.5 6.5 40.0 8.0 1.9 1.3 0.2 0.5 3.2 0.4 1.6 1.8
Total Acres Organically Farmed 145.2
14
J
7
Million Dollar
Crops
Gross Value/Million Dollars Ranking
Category 2006 2005 2006 2005
Cattle & Calves 17.9 11.3 1 3
Bedding Plants 13.7 19.5 2 1
Sweet Corn 13.1 14.4 3 2
Grapes 6.6 7.9 4 4
Tomatoes, All 4.8 3.5 5 7
Rangeland Pasture 3.4 3.8 6 6
Miscellaneous Vegetables 2.9 4.3 8 5
Field Corn 2.5 2.3 7 8
Hay -Alfalfa 1.9 2.3 9 9
Cherries 1.6 1.4 10 14
Apricots, All 1.6 1.3 11 15
Miscellaneous Nursery 1.6 1.5 12 12
Herbaceous Perennials 1.5 1.6 13 11
Walnuts 1.3 1.9 14 10
Indoor Decoratives 1.1 1.2 15 17
Beans 1.1 1.1 16 18
Biological Control
Pest Agent/Mechanism Scope of Program
Yellow Starthistle Hairy Weevil (Eustenopus villosus) Ongoing
(Centaurea solstitialis)
YST Flower Weevil (Larinus curtus) Ongoing
Rust Pathogen (Puccinia jaceae var. solstitialis) Ongoing
Red Gum Lerp Psyllid Encytrid Parasitoid Wasp (Psyllaephagus bliteus) Ongoing
(Glycaspis brimblecombei)
15
i
Pest
Exclusion
Diaprepes Weevil Mediterranean Fruit Fly
Shipments Inspected Total Inspected Rejections
Mail/UPS/Fed Ex 60,482 353
Truck shipments from within California 5,042 4
Truck shipments from other states 275 8
Household Goods 149 0
Quarantine Rejections Rejections
Burrowing Nematode 3
Caribbean Fruit Fly 3
Cedar-Apple Rust 12
Cereal Leaf Beetle 2
Citrus Pests 14
Japanese Beetle 11
Plum Curculio 6
West Indian Sugarcane Root Borer 1
Walnut Pests 1
Cherry Fruit Fly 1
Gypsy Moth 1
Colorado Potato Beetle 3
Glassywinged Sharpshooter 2
Nursery Stock Certificate 9
Origin/Markings 131
Target Pests
A& Q rated pests total 137
live pests found 73
Live Glassy-winged Sharpshooter 4
Other live weed pests 5
Other live pests 10
"A"and "Q"Rated Pests
Pests vary as to the level of potential harm they can do, so it is necessary to have a rating
system to represent the statewide importance of the pest to the agricultural, horticultural, forestry,
environmental, and public health interests of California. The rating of a pest also determines what
action is taken when it is found, such as: quarantines, eradication, rejection, control, cleanliness
standards, holding, inspection, and the establishment of control districts. Of special interest are
pests that are rated "A" or "Q". These organisms have the potential to cause serious harm and
require enforcement action when they are found. "A" rated pests, such as the Mediterranean Fruit
Fly, are known to cause serious harm. "Q" rated pests are those that are suspected to cause
serious harm but their status is uncertain because of incomplete information about the species.
16
Interce ptions
►
in 2006 .
Longlegged Ant Magnolia White Scale
Rating Rejections
ANTS
Solenopsis invicta / Red Imported Fire Ant A 1
Technomyrmex albipes /White-footed Ant Q 11
Pheidole megacephala / Bigheaded Ant Q 6
Other ant species Q 2
SCALES
Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli / Magnolia White Scale A 7
Pseudaulacaspis pentagona /White Peach Scale A 1
Pinnaspis strachami / Lesser Snow Scale A 2
Pinnaspis buxi / Boxwood Scale A 1
Pseudaulacaspis brimblecombei / Macadamia White Scale Q 4
Vinsonia stelllifera / Stellate Scale Q 1
Aulacaspis yasumatsui / Cycad Aulacaspis Q 1
MEALYBUGS
Maconellicoccus hirsutus / Pink Hibiscus Mealybug A 1
Other mealybug species Q 13
WHITEFLIES
Aleurodicus dispersus / Spiraling Whitefly Q 2
Orchamoplatus mammaeferus/Croton Whitefly Q 2
OTHER INSECTS, MITES, & MOLLUSCS
Darna pallivitta / Stinging Nettle Caterpillar A 1
Chrysodeixis eriosoma / Green Garden Looper A 1
Kallitaxila granulata / Planthopper Q 1
Stephanitis pyriodes /Azalea Lace Bug Q 1
Other thrip species Q 1
Other Homoptera species Q 7
Other Lepidoptera species Q 2
Other mite species Q 1
Other gastropod species Q 1
WEEDS
Cuscuta japonica/Giant Dodder A 8
Panicum virgatum/Switchgrass Q 2
Other weed species Q 2
PLANT DISEASES
Phytophthora ramorum / Sudden Oak Death Q 4
17