I used to buy 50 Christmas
cards to cover everyone on my staff, and it was never quite enough. This year I
bought 44 and had several left over. Like most parts of state government, the
Oregon Department of Agriculture’s Plant Program is shrinking. Downsizing is
hard. It is especially difficult when there is plenty of work, but money to pay
people to do it is not there.
Seventeen years ago when I
took this job, the Plant Division, as it was called then, received over 50
percent of its funding from state general funds (your taxes and mine). That
proportion has shrunk to just 3.5 percent. You've probably noticed that state
(and federal) funds are increasingly being diverted to other priorities, like
schools, prisons, and health care. For us it has meant a series of budget cuts
to our base funding. I don't see an end to that trend. The current Governor’s
Recommended Budget includes another $500,000 cut to ODA’s Noxious Weed Control
Program.
Thankfully, some cuts have
been offset by additional federal and lottery funds, but these are typically
tied to on-the-ground projects or national priorities. If a noxious weed or
invasive pest is causing a problem, grant funding becomes available for that
species. This sort of targeted funding makes for good accountability, but it
fosters a reactive approach. When something bad happens, money appears; when
nothing bad happens, the money disappears. The problem with invasive weeds and
pests is that nothing bad happens for the many years after an introduction
until the infestation has spread and starts to impact desirable crops or
habitats. By then, it is very costly or impossible to eradicate the problem.
We'd be better off with a
proactive strategy. Exclusion-based on early detection and rapid response
(EDRR) is the most cost effective way of dealing with invasive species, but the
money that used to fund our early detection surveys has largely disappeared. No
one wants to pay for a prevention program, especially when there are so many
other demands on public funds.
So where do we go from
here? We can accept shrinking budgets and convert to reactive programs
knowing they will be less successful, or we can figure out a better way to fund
EDRR programs. The options I see fall into three categories:
1. public base funding, i.e., the old system
2. a dedicated fee (a surcharge on something) or
3. tax the pathways approach (small surcharges
on trade and travel activities that bring us invasive weeds and pests)
Personally, I think our
public invasive species programs are crucial. Because there is no profit in
EDRR, I can't imagine them being done by the private sector. Who else but
public agencies are going to survey for gypsy moths, zebra mussels, or
kudzu? Who else has the authority to eradicate an infestation of Japanese
beetle or distaff thistle no matter the land ownership?
In the next couple of
years, I expect to spend considerable time trying to find stable funding for
Oregon's invasive species programs. I
think it is time for a fresh, comprehensive look at the needs and possible
revenue sources. The first steps were discussed yesterday at the Oregon Invasive
Species Council meeting. If you have ideas or passion about protecting Oregon
from invasive species, we’d love to hear from you. Our chances of success are
better if we work together.
Dan Hilburn
