United States

Department of

Agriculture

Animal and 

Plant Health 

Inspection

Service

Asian Longhorned Beetle

Control Program

Environmental Assessment,

December 1996
United States

Department of

Agriculture

Animal and 

Plant Health

Inspection 

Service 

Asian Longhorned Beetle

Control Program

Environmental Assessment, 

December 1996

Agency Contact:

Ronald P. Milberg

Operations Officer

Program Support

Plant Protection and Quarantine

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

U.S. Department of Agriculture

4700 River Road, Unit 134

Riverdale, MD 20737-1236

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination

in its programs on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex,

religion, age, disability, political beliefs, and marital or familial status. 

(Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with

disabilities who require alternative means for communication of

program information (braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should

contact the USDA Office of Communications at (202) 720-2791.
Table of Contents

I. Need for the Proposed Action ..................... . 1

II. Alternatives .................................... . 1

A. No Action ................................... . 1

B. Regulatory Quarantine Only .................... . 1

C. Suppression ................................. . 2

D. Eradication (The Preferred Alternative) ........... . 2

III. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives 2

A. No Action ................................... . 2

B. Regulatory Quarantine Only .................... . 3

C. Suppression ................................. . 3

D. Eradication (The Preferred Alternative) ........... . 3

IV. Agencies, Organizations, and Individuals Consulted ... . 5
1

I. Need for the Proposed Action

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service (APHIS), is proposing a program for the control of the Asian longhorned

beetle, Anoplophora glabripennis (Motschulsky). The program is necessary to reduce

the potential for damage from this major pest of trees. The Asian longhorned beetle

bores into and kills a variety of tree species (including species of maple, elm, chestnut,

mulberry, poplar, and willow). This nonnative pest has the potential to spread to other

areas of the United States and cause extensive losses to ornamental and commercial

tree species. It has been detected in the Greenpoint section of Brooklyn, New York,

and in a small area of Amityville, New York, and ultimately may be found in other

areas as well. 

APHIS' authority for action in this proposal is based upon and complies with various

enabling statutes or regulations, including the Incipient and Emergency Control of

Pests [Act] (1937), the Organic Act of the Department of Agriculture (1944), and the

Cooperation with State Agencies in the Administration and Enforcement of Certain

Federal Laws Act (1962). Under APHIS' National Environmental Policy Act

Implementing Procedures, 7 CFR Part 372, the proposed action is a class of action for

which an environmental assessment (EA) is normally prepared. This EA considers the

potential effects of the proposed action and its alternatives, including no action.

II. Alternatives

A. No Action

Under the no action alternative, APHIS would take no action of any kind. Some

actions may be taken by other Federal or non-Federal entities; those actions would not

be under APHIS control or funded by APHIS. In the absence of effective measures

taken by other entities, the Asian longhorned beetle could increase its numbers and

spread to other areas.

B. Regulatory Quarantine Only

Under the regulatory quarantine only alternative, APHIS would quarantine the infested

area and regulate commodities that could harbor the pest. Restrictions on movement

and/or treatment of those commodities would reduce the spread of Asian longhorned

beetle to other areas. Control actions, even eradication actions, could be undertaken by

other Federal or non-Federal entities; those actions would not be under APHIS control

or funded by APHIS.
2

C. Suppression

Under the suppression alternative, APHIS would use (singly or in combination) any of

various control methods to reduce, but not eliminate, the population of Asian

longhorned beetles. These methods could include physical and cultural control.

Objectives of suppression might be to reduce the damage to trees in the known infested

area or to reduce the pest’s potential for spread. The Asian longhorned beetle still

would be able to spread by natural and human-assisted means. 

A suppression program would last for an undetermined period of time.

D. Eradication (The Preferred Alternative)

Under the eradication alternative, APHIS would quarantine the infested area and

regulate commodities to prevent the spread of the Asian longhorned beetle, and would

employ physical and cultural control methods (tree removal and destruction or tree

pruning) to eradicate (or reduce to undetectable levels) its populations. An eradication

program could expand if additional infestations of the Asian longhorned beetle are

found and would cease after the pest population is eliminated.

III. Environmental Impacts of the

Proposed Action and Alternatives

A. No Action

Environmental impacts that could result from APHIS’ implementation of the no action

alternative include damage to and loss of valuable ornamental trees in the infested

areas (Brooklyn and Amityville), spread of the pest to other areas of the country with

resultant damage to and loss of ornamental and commercial trees, and private or

uncoordinated use of pesticides to control the pest with associated adverse impacts to

the environment (the physical environment, human environment, and nontarget

species). The wide distribution of potential host plants of the Asian long-horned beetle

indicates possible spread across much of the country with increases in damage and

losses commensurate with the spread. The damage and losses could result in

reductions in private property value. The damage and losses to commercial trees

would lower the value and production of timber and maple syrup. The changes in the

composition and age structure of the forest from no action would have long-term

effects on the ecological relationships in the forested areas. There could be losses in

recreational revenue to some areas from diminished amount of certain activities such as

fall foliage visitations. The potential for future quarantine restrictions on export of

logs and nursery stock is more likely if the no action alternative is selected. 
3

B. Regulatory Quarantine Only

Under a regulatory quarantine only, in the absence of effective eradication measures by

non-APHIS entities, the Asian longhorned beetle would be expected to spread through

natural means, resulting in virtually the same impacts as the no action alternative

above. Although the rate of spread of the beetle would be much slower with the

regulatory quarantine than with no action, the potential for damage and losses would

be similar as the infested area expanded. The regulatory quarantine only alternative

might facilitate suppression or eradication efforts by non-APHIS entities by containing

the pest or reducing its movement to other areas.

C. Suppression

In a suppression program, the adverse impacts (weakened and destroyed trees) from

the Asian longhorned beetle would be reduced. However, suppression would result in

continued loss of esthetically and commercially valuable trees. The continuing

program would exacerbate objections concerning government intrusion and regulation. 

The actions of non-APHIS entities to contain or control the beetle are possible, but

their limited ability to coordinate use of resources against the beetle might limit their

effectiveness. Effective control would be particularly difficult if the pest were to

become widespread throughout the range of the known host plants. 

D. Eradication (The Preferred Alternative)

Under the preferred alternative, Asian longhorned beetle eradication, regulatory

quarantines would be combined with other control methods to eliminate any current or

future infestation of the beetles. Potential adverse impacts would be limited to the

infested areas in Brooklyn and Amityville with a good regulatory quarantine to contain

the pest and eliminate infested host plants. The burning and chipping of all materials

from host tree removal before May 1 should result in elimination of the beetle from

known infested sites. The continuing quarantine and monitoring would indicate if any

infested sites or infected host materials were not detected in the early investigation. 

The adverse impacts from burning and cutting of the host tree materials in the infested

areas are minimal. The amount of burning and chipping is less for this alternative than

for the other alternatives due to quantity of infested host material. The amount of host

material to be destroyed in the small infested area is likely to be less than the amount if

the beetle has the chance to spread. The impacts of chipping are negligible. All

burning will be done in compliance with local laws. Although smoke and particulate

emissions will occur with burning, the amount of host material to be burned is limited

within the infested areas. The actual burning would occur in winter and spring when

the weather conditions are windy. This results in good mixing of emissions, and the

potential for atmospheric inversions (poor air quality) is minimal. 
4

Potential adverse impacts (direct, indirect, and cumulative) of the preferred action on

the agricultural and nonagricultural environmental components were considered in

detail. Any special and unique characteristics of the preferred action’s area were

considered with respect to the influence on the kinds, amounts, and severity of

potential adverse impacts. APHIS anticipates that implementation of the preferred

action at the site-specific level would affect the quality of the human environment

minimally, if at all. Standard operating procedures and protective measures ensure that

impacts to environmental quality are minimized to the fullest extent possible. The

most likely result of the preferred action would be beneficial impacts to agricultural

environmental components, growers, and consumers.

Although use of other control methods was considered, there were efficacy and

environmental issues that made these less feasible. Use of biological control would not

be effective in eradication because this species has been shown to cause damage within

its native range despite the presence of associated natural enemies. Use of chemical

control in an eradication program requires high levels of efficacy from the treatments

to be effective and practical. Chemicals applied to control eggs or adult Asian

longhorned beetle must be effective for extended periods of time (May to October). 

Chemicals applied to control larvae must be effective and systemic in the inner bark

and cambium of the host plant when the larvae first begin feeding. None of the

chemical treatments have been shown to be very effective or practical for eradicating

the life stages of this beetle. The unavailability of effective chemical controls

precludes any potential concerns over their safety, environmental impacts, and the level

of pesticide residues in derived products (i.e., products like timber and maple syrup). 

Consistent with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and its implementing regulations,

potential adverse impacts to federally listed endangered and threatened species and

their critical habitats were considered in detail. No effect on endangered and

threatened species and their critical habitats is anticipated as a consequence of

implementing the preferred action.

Consistent with Executive Order No. 12898, “Federal Actions to Address

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” APHIS

considered the potential for disproportionately high and adverse human health or

environmental effects on any minority populations and low-income populations. No

disproportionate effects on such populations are anticipated as a consequence of

implementing the preferred action.

IV. Agencies, Organizations, and

Individuals Consulted
5

This EA was prepared and reviewed by APHIS. The addresses of participating APHIS

units, cooperators, and consultants (as applicable) follow.

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Plant Protection and Quarantine

Program Support

4700 River Road, Unit 134

Riverdale, MD 20737-1236

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Policy and Program Development

Environmental Analysis and Documentation

4700 River Road, Unit 149

Riverdale, MD 20737-1238
1

Finding of No Significant Impact

Asian Longhorned Beetle Control Program

Environmental Assessment

December 1996

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), has prepared an

environmental assessment (EA) for a proposed program to quarantine and control the Asian longhorned beetle, a

serious exotic pest of trees—including elm, maple, mulberry, poplar, and willow. 

The Asian longhorned beetle has been found in the Greenpoint section of Brooklyn, New York, and in Amityville, New

York. The proposed program is needed to reduce damage to valuable trees from the Asian longhorned beetle, to

prevent the spread of the Asian longhorned beetle to other areas of the 

United States (especially forest ecosystems), and to comply with relevant pest control statutes and regulations. 

The EA, incorporated by reference in this document, is available from the following offices:

U.S. Department of Agriculture or U.S. Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Plant Protection and Quarantine Plant Protection and Quarantine, NRO

Domestice and Emergency Programs Blason II, 1st Floor

4700 River Road, Unit 134 505 South Lenola Road

Riverdale, MD 20737-1236 Moorestown, NJ 08057-5073

The EA analyzed four alternatives—no action, regulatory quarantine only, suppression, and eradication. Based on

the information presented in the EA, I have selected eradication as the preferred alternative because of its

capability to achieve the program's objective in a way that reduces the magnitude of potential environmental

consequences. 

APHIS considered the potential environmental consequences of each alternative. Based on analysis of the

environmental impacts, APHIS has determined that there would be no significant impact from the implementation of

the control program. APHIS' finding of no significant impact for this program was based upon the appropriate use

of control methods for the program and their expected environmental consequences, as analyzed within the EA. 

APHIS will consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure that this program will have no adverse effects

on endangered and threatened species.

It also appears, consistent with Executive Order No. 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in

Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” that implementation of the control program will not result in

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on any minority populations and

low-income populations. 
2

APHIS will implement the preferred alternative because it has the greatest chance of achieving the program

objective with the least overall risk to human health and the natural environment.