United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Forests and 

Forest Health, Committee on Resources, 

House of Representatives 

INVASIVE FOREST PESTS

Recent Infestations and 

Continued Vulnerabilities at 

Ports of Entry Place U.S. 

Forests at Risk 

Statement of Daniel Bertoni, Acting Director 

Natural Resources and Environment 

For Release on Delivery

Expected at 4:00 p.m. EDT

Wednesday, June 21, 2006 

 

GAO-06-871T 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

June 21, 2006

INVASIVE FOREST PESTS 

Recent Infestations and Continued 

Vulnerabilities at Ports of Entry Place 

U.S. Forests at Risk 

Highlights of GAO-06-871T, a testimony 

before the Subcommittee on Forests and 

Forest Health, Committee on Resources, 

House of Representatives

Invasive forest pests have seriously

harmed our environment and 

imposed significant costs on our 

economy. The U.S. Department of

Agriculture (USDA) is the lead

agency for responding to forest

pests and coordinates with the 

Department of Homeland Security

(DHS) to prevent pests from

entering the country. GAO issued 

two reports in 2006 on these

programs. This testimony 

describes (1) the status of USDA’s 

efforts to eradicate the Asian 

longhorned beetle, emerald ash 

borer, and Phytophthora

ramorum; (2) the factors affecting 

the success of those eradication 

efforts; and (3) areas of continued

vulnerability in regard to 

preventing the arrival and spread of

forest pests. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommended in its report on 

forest pests that USDA (1) expand

efforts to monitor forest health 

conditions in urban areas, 

particularly those deemed high risk 

for potential infestations; and (2) 

regularly update and publish 

management plans for pests that

include status information and

funding needs. GAO recommended

in its report on port inspections 

that DHS and USDA (1) establish a 

process to identify and assess 

foreign pest risks and implement a 

staffing model to meet those risks,

(2) improve the communication of

pest alerts and other policies 

between agencies, and (3) improve 

the effectiveness of the canine 

inspection program. 

On the basis of the available evidence, it appears that the Asian longhorned 

beetle will be eradicated in the three states that have infestations, although 

funding reductions have extended the likely completion date. In contrast, 

the emerald ash borer and P. ramorum—the pathogen that causes Sudden 

Oak Death—are likely to continue to infest and damage forest ecosystems in

the Midwest and on the West Coast, despite efforts to control them. 

 

The success of the federal responses to these infestations has been affected 

by several factors. First, the unique biological characteristics of each 

species greatly influences the ability to effectively control them. Second, 

quarantines have helped contain the spread of the pests, but implementing

and enforcing quarantines has been difficult. Third, the only available 

method for eradicating these pests is to destroy infested trees and plants—a 

costly and sometimes impractical approach. Fourth, despite budgeting over 

$420 million to control these three pests, USDA program managers told GAO 

that funding has not been sufficient to fully implement their programs. We 

also found that USDA had not adequately prepared up-to-date management 

plans to provide decision makers and the public with current information on 

the extent of the infestation, eradication goals, and long-term funding needs.

We identified areas of vulnerability that we believe increase the risk of 

future forest pest infestations. Specifically, we found that despite efforts to 

expand USDA’s forest health monitoring programs, they do not adequately 

provide for comprehensive monitoring in urban forests or other locations 

considered at high risk from pest invasions. Monitoring in such areas is 

important because they are common destination points for internationally

traded cargo, which is a frequent pathway for pests. Improvements could 

help prevent situations such as those experienced with the Asian longhorned

beetle, the emerald ash borer, and P. ramorum, in which years of delay in 

detection allowed them to become established before control programs 

began. In our report on port inspections, we found that DHS has not used a 

risk-based staffing model to assign newly hired agricultural specialists to 

ports of entry. As a result, DHS does not have assurance that staff are 

assigned to areas of greatest vulnerability. In addition, despite an 

interagency agreement intended to facilitate coordination between DHS and 

USDA, agricultural specialists are not consistently receiving notifications of 

changes to policies and urgent inspection alerts in a timely manner. We also

reported that DHS has allowed the canine inspection program—dogs trained 

to locate items that might harbor pests—to deteriorate. Dozens of canine 

units are vacant, and the proficiency scores of the remaining canine units 

have declined. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-871T.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Daniel Bertoni 

at (202) 512-3841 or bertonid@gao.gov. 
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss federal efforts to prevent the 

introduction of agricultural pests into the United States and to control and 

eradicate pests once they have entered. As you know, our public and 

private forests provide enormous value to the nation in the form of raw 

materials for building supplies and fuel, natural resources for wildlife 

habitat, air and water purification, and opportunities for recreation. The 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is responsible for protecting the 

health of the nation’s forests from harmful pests. The Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and the Forest Service are USDA’s lead 

agencies in this regard, and they often work with other federal, state, and

local agencies to manage and eradicate invasive species infestations. In 

addition, USDA and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 

coordinate port inspection programs intended to prevent the entry of new 

agricultural pests, including those that threaten forest resources. 

Forest pests can have substantial impacts on our environment and 

economy, costing society billions of dollars in lost revenue and restoration 

expenses. When forest pests kill trees, they reduce the value of 

timberlands and residential property, harm businesses, increase the risk of 

wildfire, degrade ecosystems, and place upon homeowners and local 

governments the costly burden of removing dead trees before they become 

a safety hazard. Hundreds of nonnative invasive insect and pathogen 

species have already infested our nation’s forests, resulting in huge losses 

of native tree species. Furthermore, because of the large number of 

visitors and enormous volume of foreign cargo that arrive in the United 

States every day, there is the potential that other pests may pass through 

our borders and cause further damage. 

My testimony today is based on two recent GAO reports. The first is a 

report we provided to the full committee in April on three serious forest 

pests—the Asian longhorned beetle; the emerald ash borer; and 

Phytophthora ramorum, the pathogen that causes Sudden Oak Death—

and other matters relating to forest monitoring.1

 The second is a May 2006 

report provided to congressional requesters that reviewed the transfer of 

agricultural inspection activities at ports of entry from USDA to DHS and 

 1

GAO, Invasive Forest Pests: Lessons Learned from Three Recent Infestations May Aid in

Managing Future Efforts, GAO-06-353 (Washington, D.C.: April 21, 2006). 

Page 1 GAO-06-871T 
how this transfer has affected the inspection program.2

 Drawing from 

those reports, my testimony will discuss: (1) the status of USDA’s efforts 

to eradicate the Asian longhorned beetle, emerald ash borer, and P. 

ramorum; (2) the factors affecting the success of those eradication 

efforts; and (3) areas of continued vulnerability in regard to preventing the 

arrival and spread of forest pests. 

In summary, efforts to eradicate the Asian longhorned beetle appear likely 

to succeed, while efforts against the emerald ash borer and P. ramorum

do not. The Asian longhorned beetle infests localized areas in Illinois, New 

Jersey, and New York, and program managers are optimistic that the pest

can be eradicated from the United States. In contrast, the emerald ash 

borer and P. ramorum infest much more extensive areas—40,000 and 

19,000 square miles in the Midwest and on the West Coast, respectively.

Program managers do not believe these pests can be eradicated from the 

natural environment because of the size of the areas that are already 

infested and thus have set containment goals for the pest management 

programs. The impact of these two infestations could reach tens of billions 

of dollars in damages. 

Summary 

The success of federal efforts to eradicate these pests has been affected by

several factors. First, the unique biological characteristics of each species 

greatly influence the ability to effectively control them. For example, the 

Asian longhorned beetle is a large, conspicuous bug that does not fly far 

from the core infestation, while the other two species are more insidious 

and can spread more rapidly and over greater distances. Second, 

quarantines have helped contain the spread of the pests, but 

implementation and enforcement have been difficult. Each of these pests 

can be transported inadvertently by virtually anyone through activities as 

seemingly benign as moving firewood to a vacation home; educating the 

public about the quarantines and enforcing them are daunting tasks. Third, 

the only available method for eradicating these pests is to destroy infested 

trees and plants—an obviously costly and sometimes impractical approach 

when needed over large areas. Lastly—a problem faced by many 

government programs—according to program managers, funding has not 

been sufficient to fully implement the pest management programs. 

 2

GAO, Homeland Security: Management and Coordination Problems Increase the 

Vulnerability of U.S. Agriculture to Foreign Pests and Disease, GAO-06-644 (Washington,

D.C.: May 19, 2006). 

Page 2 GAO-06-871T 
Although USDA has spent over $420 million to control these pests, a 

decline in recent funding levels will likely result in a longer time frame for 

eradicating the Asian longhorned beetle, and current funding may be 

inadequate to even contain the emerald ash borer and P. ramorum. With 

respect to program funding, we also found that USDA had not adequately 

prepared management plans that account for the extent of the current 

infestations, long-term funding needs, and the implications of known or 

anticipated funding levels on the schedule for control activities. We 

believe that better management plans would provide decision makers at 

the state and national levels with important information about the shortand long-term costs associated with pest management programs. 

Accordingly, we recommended that the Secretary of Agriculture routinely 

prepare and update pest management plans with such information. 

In our reports on forest pests and the coordination of agricultural 

inspections, we identified areas of vulnerability that we believe increase 

the risk of future forest pest infestations. With regard to the three forest 

pests we reviewed, we found that delays in detecting the presence of the 

pests in the United States allowed them to become established in the 

environment before control programs began. For example, while the Asian 

longhorned beetle was detected at several ports, no additional monitoring 

was done to determine whether the pest had entered the natural 

environment; had such monitoring been done, the pest might have been 

more easily and quickly eradicated, and the cost to do so may have been 

considerably less. USDA has taken steps in recent years to expand some of 

its forest monitoring programs. However, the programs still do not 

adequately cover urban areas and other locations at high risk of receiving

infested cargo. To help detect forest pests, we recommended that the 

Secretary of Agriculture expand current efforts to monitor forest health 

conditions, particularly in urban areas that are at high risk of receiving

invasive insects and diseases. While timely detection of potentially harmful 

pests in the environment is important, preventing their entry into the 

United States is the first line of defense. However, in our report on USDA 

and DHS coordination of port inspections, we identified several problems 

that raise questions about the ability of the agencies to effectively protect 

the United States against forest pests and other harmful organisms. First, 

we found that less than one-quarter of agricultural specialists conducting

inspections routinely receive urgent alerts about potential agricultural 

threats in a timely manner. Second, we found that the agencies did not 

have staff assigned to ports and other inspection locations on the basis of 

an assessment of the potential vulnerability of those locations to the 

arrival of new, potentially harmful pests. Finally, DHS has allowed the 

number and proficiency of agricultural canine units—which are used to 

Page 3 GAO-06-871T 
target passengers and cargo for agricultural inspections—to decline. We 

made several recommendations to USDA and DHS to address these and 

other deficiencies to strengthen the programs intended to prevent the 

entry of harmful agricultural pests into the country. 

The impact of invasive species in the United States is widespread, and 

their consequences for the economy and the environment are profound.3

Invasive species are nonnative plants, animals, and microorganisms 

intentionally or unintentionally brought into a new environment. Once in

that new location, these species may be able to crowd out native species, 

multiply at a rapid rate, and spread to other locations. These invaders can

also affect people’s livelihoods and pose a significant risk to industries 

such as agriculture, ranching, and fishing. The cost to control invasive 

species and the cost of the damages they inflict are estimated at billions of

dollars annually. 

Background 

With respect to our nation’s forests, the history of harmful invasive species

is long. For example, starting in the early 1800s, American chestnut trees 

were devastated by a succession of two nonnative pathogens—ink disease 

and chestnut blight. Chestnut trees were a major component of the 

nation’s deciduous forests, were valuable to wildlife, and had wide use as 

a source of lumber. Today, chestnut trees still survive in much of their 

former range, but only as sprouts from the old root systems. The gypsy 

moth is another serious invasive forest species that continues to harm our 

nation’s forests more than 130 years after its accidental release by an 

amateur entomologist studying silkworms. 

Each of the three forest pests we reviewed in our April report likely 

entered our country in the last 20 years. The Asian longhorned beetle

likely entered in the mid-1980s, currently infests areas in Illinois, New 

Jersey, and New York, and affects hardwood trees such as maple and elm. 

The emerald ash borer likely entered the United States in the early 1990s 

and infests about 40,000 square miles in Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and some 

parts of Canada. A small infestation was confirmed just last week in 

Illinois. The borer affects all 16 species of North American ash trees. It is 

thought that the pathogen that causes Sudden Oak Death, P. ramorum, 

 3

GAO, Invasive Species: Cooperation and Coordination Are Important for Effective

Management of Invasive Weeds, GAO-05-185 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 25, 2005); and 

Invasive Species: Clearer Focus and Greater Commitment Needed to Effectively Manage 

the Problem, GAO-03-1 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 22, 2002). 

Page 4 GAO-06-871T 
entered the country as early as the mid-1990s, although how it arrived is 

unknown. Of the three pests we reviewed, P. ramorum affects the widest 

range of species, including various species of oak and ornamental plants 

such as rhododendrons and camellias. The pathogen has affected more 

than 19,000 square miles in California and one county in southwestern 

Oregon. Together, according to USDA, these forest pests have the 

potential to cause the loss of trees valued at trillions of dollars. 

APHIS is the lead federal agency responsible for responding to insects and 

diseases that have entered the country and that might harm U.S. 

agriculture. APHIS conducts detection surveys, issues quarantines, directs 

eradication efforts such as removing infested trees or applying pesticides,

develops control technologies, and performs public outreach. The Forest 

Service—which has federal responsibility for protecting the nation’s 

forests—conducts surveys and research and undertakes reforestation of 

areas affected by pests. DHS plays a critical role in protecting agricultural 

interests—including the nation’s forests—by coordinating activities with 

USDA designed to keep pests out of the country. DHS inspects ships, 

airplanes, vehicles, cargo, and passengers and their baggage for prohibited 

agricultural materials that may serve as carriers for pests and disease. 

USDA conducted agricultural inspections in the past, but the Homeland 

Security Act of 2002 transferred this function, among others, to DHS.4

Funding for pest management activities comes through annual

appropriations and the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC), which is a 

government-owned entity that finances farm commodity, conservation, 

and trade programs and provides funding for agricultural-related 

emergencies.

5

 The Secretary may transfer funds from the CCC (or other 

available USDA appropriations) for the arrest, control, eradication, and 

prevention of the spread of a plant pest and related expenses.

State agencies also play an important role in managing invasive species. 

For example, state agencies impose quarantines to prevent the movement 

of infested materials within their state and take actions to eradicate pests. 

Working with APHIS, state agencies also monitor for specific plant pests, 

including some that have already arrived in the country and others that 

have not but are believed to pose a threat. In addition, APHIS and the 

Forest Service enter into cooperative agreements with states to jointly 

 4

Pub. L. No. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135 (2002). 

5

The corporation has the authority to borrow up to $30 billion. The borrowed funds are

repaid through periodic congressional appropriations. 

Page 5 GAO-06-871T 
carry out eradication programs and provide funding assistance for these 

programs. 

Evidence suggests that the Asian longhorned beetle will be eradicated, 

while the emerald ash borer and P. ramorum are likely to continue to 

infest and damage forest ecosystems indefinitely, despite efforts to control 

them. 

• Asian longhorned beetle: Efforts to eradicate the Asian longhorned 

beetle appear likely to succeed in New Jersey, New York, and Illinois. 

Over 8,000 trees infested with the beetle have been removed, and over 

600,000 trees have been chemically treated to protect against beetle 

infestations. As a result of these and other actions, federal and state 

agencies have been able to reduce the size of the infested areas. 

APHIS's current goals for Illinois and New Jersey are to confirm 

eradication and end the management programs in 2008 and 2012, 

respectively. The current goal for declaring eradication in New York is 

2021.

Eradicating the Asian 

Longhorned Beetle 

Appears Likely, While 

Success on the 

Emerald Ash Borer 

and P. ramorum Is 

Less Promising 

• Emerald ash borer: In contrast, we reported in April that it is unlikely 

that the emerald ash borer can be eradicated in the United States. Its 

small size, inconspicuous habits, and flight capabilities have aided the 

spread of the borer. In addition, human activities, such as moving 

infested firewood, have amplified the natural spread of the insect. 

Current management goals call for eradicating the borer in Indiana and 

Ohio and containing it in Michigan, which has the most extensive 

infestations. The pest has killed an estimated 15 million trees. USDA 

estimated that the cost of removing and replacing dead ash trees in 

urban and suburban areas could reach $7 billion over a 25-year period. 

• P. ramorum: Similar to the borer, it is unlikely that P. ramorum can 

be eradicated in the United States. Managing the pathogen is difficult 

given the size of the infestation and the many ways it can be spread—

through movement of plant material, soil on car tires, and possibly 

even fog. APHIS and state agencies have attempted to eradicate the 

pathogen from forests in only a few situations where the infestations 

were relatively small, such as in Curry County, Oregon. While 

seemingly impossible to eradicate from the natural environment, 

APHIS and state agencies are hoping to eradicate the pathogen from 

nurseries to reduce the risk that infected ornamental plants will spread 

the pathogen to other locations in the country. P. ramorum has killed 

tens of thousands of trees and led to the destruction of over 1 million 

Page 6 GAO-06-871T 
nursery plants. These trees and plants were worth millions of dollars in 

ornamental, timber, wildlife, and environmental value. 

The success of efforts to eradicate the Asian longhorned beetle, the 

emerald ash borer, and P. ramorum has been affected by factors relating 

to species biology, quarantines, detection and control technologies, and 

funding. 

Specific biological characteristics of each of the three pests greatly 

influence the potential success of eradication efforts. The Asian 

longhorned beetle is a large, conspicuous bug that does not fly far from 

the core infestation. As a result, it is fairly noticeable and does not spread 

quickly, making it easier to detect and control. Conversely, the emerald 

ash borer and P. ramorum are more insidious and can spread over greater 

distances and more rapidly, making control efforts more difficult. 

Many Factors Affect 

the Success of 

Eradication Efforts 

Species Biology 

Quarantines Officials involved with all three pests believe that the use of quarantines 

has helped to reduce the spread of the pests but we observed that 

implementing quarantines can be difficult. Quarantines help limit the 

spread of an invasive species by regulating the movement of potentially 

infested materials—such as firewood, nursery plants, and wood debris. 

However, the effectiveness of quarantines is limited by the prevailing 

knowledge about how the pest spreads and about the extent of its 

infestation. Since the Asian longhorned beetle infestations were relatively 

small, identifying the geographic boundaries for quarantines was fairly 

easy. In contrast, the boundaries for the quarantines for the borer were 

revised several times in response to information that indicated the 

infestations were much larger than originally thought. As a result of the 

incorrect quarantine boundaries, there was a greater risk that people 

would move infested material to unaffected locations. Similarly, the 

quarantines for P. ramorum had to be revised after learning that a nursery

outside the quarantined area had become infested and had shipped plants

to at least 22 states. 

The success of quarantines can also depend heavily on effectively 

educating the public about the ways in which pests can be spread. For 

each of the three forest pest species we reviewed, certain normally 

harmless actions—such as moving firewood or tracking soil in hiking 

boots—can result in transporting the pests to new locations. Because 

nearly any individual can engage in such actions, including residents 

Page 7 GAO-06-871T 
traveling to campgrounds or vacation homes and small firewood dealers, it 

is hard to define and reach target audiences with information about 

quarantines and enforcement efforts. Educating the public about activities 

that could spread the pests and then enforcing compliance with 

quarantines are thus daunting tasks. While stakeholders believe that 

outreach efforts by the three pest management programs have helped 

educate the public about the dangers of individual actions, all it takes is 

one piece of infested firewood or contaminated soil to start a potential 

infestation. 

Detection and Control 

Technologies 

Successful control and eradication of the three forest pests we reviewed 

have been constrained by a lack of cost-effective tools for detecting and 

eliminating the pests. Detection methods for the three pests consist largely 

of visual observations, and in the case of P. ramorum, costly laboratory 

diagnostics. Such methods are not always effective and, given the size of 

the infestations, are resource intensive and time consuming. Research is 

ongoing into various technologies to develop better detection capabilities, 

such as chemical lures for the beetle and borer. 

Eradication methods are similarly limited.6

 Currently, the only option is to

destroy the infested tree or plant material as well as nearby trees and 

plants suspected of being infested, usually by cutting, chipping, or burning. 

This approach has been used to eradicate infestations of the Asian 

longhorned beetle. Although we refer to the beetle’s infestations as 

“relatively small,” over 8,000 infested trees have been removed. Such 

efforts, however, are not practical given the size of the infestations of 

emerald ash borer and P. ramorum. As a result, managers have used 

selective removal of trees infested with the emerald ash borer and P. 

ramorum to eradicate small outlying infestations. Trees are also being 

removed along the perimeter of large emerald ash borer infestations in 

hopes of containing them. The most extensive eradication efforts for P. 

ramorum are occurring in nurseries for plants that are infested or 

suspected of being infested; these are routinely destroyed according to 

quarantine regulations. Although removal of trees with emerald ash borer 

and P. ramorum has been selective, hundreds of thousands of infested or 

potentially infested trees have been destroyed. Unfortunately, there are no

 6

By eradication, we mean the actual killing of pests that are infesting trees and plants. We 

recognize that there are other important components of a management program, including 

surveys, quarantines, preventive treatments, and public outreach, that may help reduce the

spread of pests.

Page 8 GAO-06-871T 
chemical or biological treatments available to effectively kill the pests on a 

broad scale, although research is ongoing to develop methods of killing 

these pests without requiring the removal and destruction of infested trees 

and plants. Preventive chemical treatments have been used extensively for 

the Asian longhorned beetle—over 600,000 trees have been treated—but 

only to a limited extent for the other two pests and primarily by home 

owners to protect valuable landscape trees. 

Funding Levels The federal government has provided over $420 million for programs to 

control the three infestations we reviewed, primarily through the CCC 

fund and appropriations to APHIS’s emerging plant pest program. States 

have also provided funding for management actions, although it has 

generally been less than the federal investment. However, program 

officials involved with managing the three pests told us either that funding 

has not been what was needed or that they are concerned about the 

prospects for maintaining existing efforts in light of funding constraints. 

Some management officials also noted that the unpredictable timing of 

funding, particularly the transfers from the CCC fund, hamper their ability 

to plan and implement control activities. 

Over the years, USDA has allocated about $249 million to control the Asian 

longhorned beetle, $112 million for the emerald ash borer, and $61 million 

for P. ramorum.7

 For the beetle and borer, program managers told us that 

funding shortfalls will limit the control and eradication actions that can be 

taken. We reported in April that funding reductions for the beetle during 

fiscal years 2002 and 2003 resulted in moving the target date for 

completing the eradication program from 2009 to 2014, but current funding 

levels placed that date in question. In June 2006, APHIS issued a revised

strategic plan that projected a completion date in New York of 2021. For 

the emerald ash borer, state officials in Michigan and Ohio have 

announced that programs for removing trees in infested areas have been 

significantly reduced because of a lack of federal funding. Nearly all 

stakeholders we interviewed regarding P. ramorum raised concerns that

funding has not been adequate to contain the pathogen. 

 7

Funding for the Asian longhorned beetle program began in fiscal year 1997, for the P. 

ramorum program in fiscal year 2000, and for the emerald ash borer program in fiscal year

2002. 

Page 9 GAO-06-871T 
Related to funding concerns, we found that timely updates to pest 

management plans for the three species have not always been available to

provide decision makers and the public with current information about 

how recent developments—including funding reductions—will affect the 

prospects for success of the containment and eradication of these pests. 

We recommended that the Secretary of Agriculture prepare, publish, and

regularly update management plans for pests for which the department 

has initiated a management program. The plans and their updates should 

incorporate and describe changes in the extent of the infestations, 

progress to date in control and eradication efforts, and long-term funding 

needs. 

In our work on the three forest pests and, more broadly, the coordination 

between USDA and DHS on invasive species prevention activities, we 

found vulnerabilities that we believe should be addressed to reduce the 

risk that new forest pests will arrive and spread. These vulnerabilities 

involve USDA’s overall forest health monitoring program and USDA’s and 

DHS’s management of port inspections. 

Other Areas of 

Continued 

Vulnerability in 

Regard to Preventing 

the Arrival and Spread 

of Pests 

Monitoring of Urban and 

Other High-Risk Locations 

Many forest pests, including at least two of the three we reviewed, were 

first introduced in urbanized environments. Urban areas are at high risk 

because they are common destinations for cargo and travelers that might 

be transporting pests. With the three pests we examined, as well as others, 

we have seen that delays in detection and identification allowed them to 

become established and spread before control efforts could begin. USDA 

has recognized the need to conduct more monitoring and has increased 

the level of resources devoted to monitoring for new forest pests. 

However, those efforts have been limited in scope, as illustrated by the 

following: 

• The Forest Service’s bark beetle survey was started in 2001. The program 

has placed traps on a temporary basis at more than 300 high-risk sites 

around the country, including in urban forests. While this program has 

demonstrated that it can detect new pest species, we found that it does not 

comprehensively cover high-risk sites and that it focuses on a limited set 

of insect species. The Forest Service told us that the agency was 

considering expanding the program. 

Page 10 GAO-06-871T 
• The Forest Service initiated a pilot project in several states to improve 

urban forest health monitoring in 1999. The project has two components. 

The first seeks to extend the agency’s normal forest sampling program, 

which traditionally has not sufficiently sampled urban forests. The second 

component seeks to implement a roadside tree assessment using plots 

established within public rights-of-way in urban areas. To date, the agency

has implemented pilot projects in Colorado, Indiana, Maryland, 

Massachusetts, New Jersey, Tennessee, and Wisconsin. Since only seven

states were covered by this pilot, systematic monitoring of urban areas is 

still not adequate. According to the director of the agency’s Urban and 

Community Forestry Program, there is a strong case to be made for 

expanding monitoring to cover urban areas that are now classified as 

nonforest but that have trees and are at risk from such pests as the 

emerald ash borer. 

As a result of the limited nature of these and other USDA monitoring 

efforts, there are still many high-risk locations that are not adequately 

covered. To reduce these risks, we recommended that the Secretary of 

Agriculture expand current efforts to monitor forest health conditions, 

particularly in urban and suburban areas that are at high risk of receiving

invasive insects and diseases. In response to this recommendation, USDA 

noted that other governmental and nongovernmental organizations have a 

role to play in combating invasive species, including monitoring. We agree

that other entities have that role, but also believe that USDA has an 

important leadership role to play in developing and supporting the forest

health monitoring capabilities of nonfederal entities. 

The infestations of the three species we reviewed, as well as others, began

when the pests passed through U.S. ports of entry, hitchhiking in vehicles, 

cargo, or travelers’ personal belongings. That pests have become 

established indicates that the first line of defense at the border has been 

breeched over the years. In May 2006, we reported that DHS and USDA 

face management and coordination problems that increase the

vulnerability of the United States to foreign pests and disease. For 

example, we found that DHS has not developed or used a risk-based 

staffing model to ensure that adequate numbers of agricultural inspectors 

are staffed to ports and other areas of greatest vulnerability. In addition, 

despite an interagency agreement intended to facilitate coordination and 

communication between DHS and USDA, agricultural specialists are not 

consistently receiving notifications of changes to inspection policies and 

urgent inspection alerts. For example, we estimated that 20 percent of 

agricultural specialists do not regularly receive notices that policy manuals 

Port Inspections 

Page 11 GAO-06-871T 
have been updated, and only 21 percent of agriculture specialists always 

receive urgent inspection alerts in a timely manner. These breakdowns in 

communication could hamper inspectors’ ability to search for and detect 

new pest threats. We also found that DHS has allowed its canine detection 

program (dogs trained to sniff out items that may harbor pests) to 

deteriorate. The number and proficiency of canine teams has decreased 

substantially over the last several years. This limits the essential 

contributions these dogs can make to prevent the entry of prohibited 

agricultural items. 

We made several recommendations to address these deficiencies that we 

believe would help reduce the likelihood that new pests will enter the 

country. For example, we recommended that the agencies establish a 

process to identify and assess the major risks posed by foreign pests and

disease, and develop and implement a national staffing model to ensure 

that staffing levels at each port are sufficient to meet those risks. We also 

recommended that USDA and DHS ensure that urgent inspection alerts 

and other information essential to safeguarding U.S. agriculture are more 

effectively shared between the departments and transmitted to DHS 

agriculture specialists in the ports. In addition, we recommended that the 

agencies improve the effectiveness of the canine program by reviewing 

policies and procedures regarding training and staffing of canines and 

ensure that these policies and procedures are followed in the port. USDA 

and DHS generally agreed with the report’s recommendations and noted 

that various initiatives are either planned or underway to address them. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to

answer any questions that you or other Members of the Committee may 

have. 

Page 12 GAO-06-871T 
For further information about this testimony, please contact me at (202) 

512-3841 or bertonid@gao.gov. Trish McClure, Ross Campbell, and Terry 

Horner made key contributions to this statement. 

Page 13 GAO-06-871T 

GAO Contact and 

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

(360725) 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER