<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 11.00.10570.1001"></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV>Dear forest pest mavens,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>a document circulating here indicates that the Trump Administration
proposes to cut funds for the current FY17) year.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The Administration proposes to cut $50 million from appropriations to APHIS
for a combination of 3 programs: "tree & wood pests", "specialty crops", and
wildlife services. Since the Fiscal Year is half over, these cuts would be
deeper even than this indicates. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This proposed cut is most alarming. "Tree & wood pests" is
currently funded at ~$54 million; APHIS spends <U>all</U> of that on just 3 tree
pests - Asian longhorned beetle, emerald ash borer, & gypsy moth. The
"specialty crops" program is funded at $156 million; $3-4 million of that goes
to sudden oak death. So, already, APHIS has funding to deal with only 4 of the
dozens of non-native insects & pathogens killing urban, rural, and
wildland trees. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>OMB has sought for more than a decade to shift response costs to the states
- despite the legal responsibility for preventing pest introductions lying with
the federal government (APHIS). In practice, relying on the states will
mean piecemeal programs - some states will fund aggressive programs, most
will not. This will undermine efficacy since these pests threaten trees
across wide swaths of the country, not just individual states.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It is somewhat unclear, but APHIS might be negotiating with the
states now about which ones will accept how much of the responsibility for which
pests. ... clearly any negotiations are shadowed by the abrupt
cut-off sword hanging over the process.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The proposals do not appear to cut funding for USFS State & Private
Forestry/Forest Health Protection or Research; it would cut funds for forest
landscape restoration projects and the urban forestry program.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Contact your members of Congress and senators and urge them to oppose this
proposal when the bill to fund government activities for the 2nd half of the
fiscal year comes to a vote. (The current continuing resolution expires at
the end of April, so the bills should be before Congress soon.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Faith</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2
face=Arial><B></B> </DIV></FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>