Insects As Weapons

An anonymous reader writes "Timothy Paine, an entomologist at the University of California-Riverside, recently 'committed to the scientific record the idea that California's eucalyptus trees may have been biologically sabotaged, publishing an article [in the Journal of Economic Entomology] raising the possibility of bioterrorism.' Specifically, Paine argues that foreign insect pests have been deliberately introduced in the Golden State, in hopes of decimating the state's population of eucalyptus (especially the two species regarded as invasive, which 'are particularly susceptible to the pests.') In California's Bioterror Mystery, Paine (and scientists who are skeptical) make their arguments. What isn't in dispute is that the insect pests have already inflicted hundreds of millions of dollars in damage, making the story a cautionary tale about what might happen if a food or crop were intentionally targeted."

Comments

Re:Eucalyptus trees are a bio terror weapon

[Karmashock]

Fairly common for many species actually. Pine trees and oak trees have a similar effect. And pine trees actually want to burn. Fire is part of a pine tree's life cycle.

One thing you can say about eucalyptus is that they smell nice.

And does anyone really care what is and isn't an invasive species?

We're an invasive species. Does this look like Africa to you? What is really relevant is if you want that species there in the first place. Trees are very hard to complain about as an invasive species. They don't grow very quickly. If you see one growing in your back yard and would rather it not... cut it down with a 10 dollar saw. If you have one already in your backyard.... cutting it down might be pricy. But that's true of any tree care.

Re:Eucalyptus trees are a bio terror weapon

[evanism]

"Fairly common for many species actually. Pine trees and oak trees have a similar effect. And pine trees actually want to burn."

I'd say most trees want to burn. Its a side effect of being made of WOOD.

Re:could be eco terrorism

[PopeRatzo]

although introducing another non native species to counter another one could and often does backfire

Man, tell me about it. Here in Chicago we've got the Japanese Longhorn beetle, Asian carp and zebra mussels wreaking havoc on our ecosystem.

People think you can do any goddamn thing you want to nature and the world's always going to be hospitable to humans.

The hundreds of thousands of people dealing with unprecedented wildfires in Colorado and the hundreds of thousands without power in 110 degree heat on the East Coast thanks to some unprecedented storms might have something to say about that. I've been alive since the Eisenhower administration and I've never seen >95 degree heat in March before this year. 100 mph winds yesterday right here and 100,000 people without power here in Chicago in 100 degree heat. I'm not saying that these anecdotes are evidence of global warming, but something definitely seems a little haywire.

I'm not even saying that Al Gore is right about anything, but the people who have been having such a great time ridiculing him for the last 10 years maybe owe him a little humble apology, just for being assholes. Right or wrong, if somebody says, "You're house might be on fire," you really at least ought to see if there are any flames and smoke before saying, "Oh, that's bullshit."

Re:Eucalyptus trees are a bio terror weapon

[Anonymous Coward]

Invasive species upset the natural balance between native species.

The "natural balance between native species" is just an intellectual construct. Before man arrrived, land bridges would form, stuff would cross and wipe out other stuff. Think of transocianic shipping as just another land bridge.

What this really boils down to is that some people think the human impact on other species should be managed one way, and some people don't think it should be managed quite so much.

In this regard, humans are most likely unique. When dinosaurs began dominating and changing ecosystems they didn't, as far as we know, contemplate whether or not they should try to preserve other species. They just ate and pooped, and probably wiped out some things.

Go back further. Oxygen? It's the toxic waste of the planet's first inhabitants.

For all we know, there's some future organism breeding now that thrives on coal ash and abandoned strip malls.

Re:Eucalyptus trees are a bio terror weapon

[cpu6502]

>>>Would I genocide mosquitoes? Absolutely. Ticks, leeches, basically any parasite, lamprays, and all sorts of other things that I'm very happy to exterminate.

The frog and spider population would plummet. They might even go extinct (some frogs are already near extinction). When you add or remove a species, you upset the balance. Let's take rabbits for example: They overran Australia because they had no natural predator. Rabbits everywhere.

Fire is natural you know

[SuperKendall]

People think you can do any goddamn thing you want to nature ... people dealing with unprecedented wildfires in Colorado

Look, the people of Colorado are as careful as anyone with how nature is handled.

The fires have nothing to do with that. Mix a drought (which is not uncommon in a semi-arid high desert, which is what the front range IS) and a lot of vegetation designed to be burnt (pine trees) and you have huge fires.

Yes it sucks but it's not the fault of people the forests are on fire.

Re:Fire is natural you know

[demachina]

I think he may have been arguing that global warming and climate change might be a possible source of the record breaking heat wave and drought, and that global warming may be due to people burning fossil fuels. It is certainly a possibility though its obviously hard to prove definitively (and certain to ignite a troll fest on /. if the leftist and rightists smell the global warming blood in the water).

It is pretty well established that people did get over zealous in preventing forest fires for most of the last century and it was a really bad idea, since forests need to be burned off at regular intervals with low intensity fires. If you dont and let brush build up and trees get too dense then when they happen now they explode and are much more dangerous and destructive. Its also true that when people building houses in brush filled canyons and in dense forest they are pretty much asking for their homes to eventually burn. Putting wooden shingles on a house, also pretty much begging to lose your home to a forest fire. Not clearing trees and brush from the immediate area around your house, strike three.

The environmentalist backlash against logging has also helped contribute to forests that are too dense, especially when coupled with aggressive forest fire prevention.

I seem to recall a few months ago one researcher had a theory that the debris field in the Pacific from the tsunami from Japan was causing a significant hot spot in the Pacific and could be altering the climate this year, though that would also be hard to prove. If it were true then it would be because people built houses on a tsunami plagued coast though needless to say people don't cause tsunamis.

Re:Eucalyptus trees are a bio terror weapon

[Karmashock]

Nonsense.

There are plenty of other insects for them to feed upon. I'm sure somewhere there is a frog that depends upon mosquitoes but that's such a tiny portion of our ecosystem you can't even pretend it matters. Not even to that habitat.

This whole notion that if any species dies the whole system collapses is idiotic. Species die all the time... NATURALLY. And the ecosystem thrives.

Wipe out all the parasites and doubtless there will be some unintended consequences. But the price will be vastly cheaper then what we're paying with the status quo.

Re:could be eco terrorism

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Talk about an impossible standard, and another moved goalpost. Once you get to "growing wheat in Greenland", it's far too late to even try to prevent it. We do know that the rate of glacial ice thaw has been increasing rapidly, more quickly than predicted.

Sure, there is a natural global climate cycle, but this acceleration of change is outside the usual range of typical climate cycles. Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 are twice that of any period in the last 400,000 years.

Re:could be eco terrorism

[uninformedLuddite]

To say that we can control any of this this at all has got to be one of the most egotistical beliefs that mankind has ever entertained.

Re:could be eco terrorism

[mrchaotica]

I don't know about you, but I can't survive eating conifers, cycads and ginkgos. Therefore, the "but it worked for the dinosaurs!" argument is somewhat less than persuasive to me.