The City of Whitewater’s municipal administration has offered a plan to combat a small, invasive insect that threatens ash trees. See, Whitewater’s Emerald Ash Borer Plan.

Whitewater, Wisconsin proudly bears a designation as a Tree City USA. Having sought the designation, it’s predictable that residents would be proud and concerned over trees in the community. We’ve had contentious debates in town over the city’s trees, more than once. We’ve gone from a Tree Commission to an Urban Forestry Commission, and several Council meetings have been occupied with the care of Whitewater’s trees.

(Many of these debates have been made far worse by the municipal administration, hurling overblown charges about officials being ‘maligned’ or citizens committing ‘egregious’ acts.)

The Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) isn’t the first pernicious insect or disease that’s threatened North American crops or trees; it won’t been the last. Pioneers faced locusts throughout the nineteenth century, and Dutch elms and chestnut trees succumbed to diseases in the twentieth. I recall my father describing the effects of Dutch Elm Disease, and how startling it was for neighborhoods to see so many fine trees lost to infection.

There are vast numbers of ash trees in America, of different varieties, so the borer threatens many communities, and whole groves may be destroyed. It’s nearly poignant that a threat to their survival comes from a tiny, beautiful insect. Whitewater’s EAB plan, with a picture of the insect on top of a penny, does not do that small insect justice — in so many other photos, the EAB is a striking, iridescent green. If it were not so destructive, the EAB would be a tiny jewel among insects. (Perhaps, even now, it’s worthy of that honor.)

When I first heard of Whitewater’s plan regarding the EAB, I thought: Perhaps, as in earlier times with locusts, we will fight against any infestation, even if the odds are long. (I’ve learned that there’s uncertainty about what caused locusts, in huge numbers, to disappear; many scientists doubt that they disappeared through human efforts, however strenuous they were).

Still, there’s something admirable in the trying, in that case and this one. If — regarding trees rather than crops — we could save some ash trees, would that not be a commitment to conservation, to preservation of part of the created order?

I’ve linked to Whitewater’s plan, and embedded it previously. But before commenting on it, I wanted to check and see if my own instincts about the plan — those of a layman — were sound.

Whitewater’s Management Plan. One sees, from the Executive Summary and other passages within the document, that this plan is not original to Whitewater. It’s from Beloit, and has been adopted for use here. There’s no dispositive wrong in taking a good plan from elsewhere and using it here.

(I’ve contended that Whitewater often takes too little of outside practices, and instead clings to a false, local exceptionalism in substitution for a genuine American exceptionalism. America, after all, does not end where Whitewater’s city limits begin.)

There is, however, a question about commitment to implementation, here in this city, if the plan’s a cribbed effort. A purchased term paper may be accurate, but it’s also evidence of indolence.

Process Boilerplate. Virtually the entire plan is collection of generic summaries or process boilerplate.

It’s not that it’s wrong, it’s that, after all, a Coversheet, Executive Summary, Index, History of EAB in Wisconsin, generic Planning Process, vague Goals/Priorities/Actions, Historical Background, full-page picture of a composite site, States Notification System, City of Whitewater Notification System, info on the City of Whitewater Command System (yes, ‘command system’), List of Regulatory Authorities, Applicable Laws Statutes Administrative Codes, outdated(!) EAB Quarantine Map, and blank end page

do not constitute a plan of action.

There’s nothing that indicates commitment or zeal to fight this infestation. On the contrary, Beloit’s plan, now Whitewater’s plan, hedges on just about every remedial measure:

There are Chemical Treatment options that may be looked at for protecting ash trees from E.A.B. It should be noted however, that Chemical Treatment carries with it trade-offs, that may not be environmentally safe. Caution should be exercised and all product information should be reviewed before product treatment is done.

Yes, but what will Whitewater actually do? There are ways to protect these trees, but there’s so much hesitation in this plan. Consider Whitewater EAB Management Plan, page 16:

Table 1. Insecticide options for professionals and homeowners for controlling EAB that have been tested in multiple university trials. Some products may not be labeled for use in all states. Some of the listed products failed to protect ash trees when they were applied at labeled rates. Inclusion of a product in this table does not imply that it is endorsed by the authors or has been consistently effective for EAB control.”

Yes, but what, if any of these, works in our state, and is there any recommendation from those who wrote this plan? Of what use is a plan that disclaims much, but offers little? For prevention or cure, wouldn’t no plan be as preventive as this plan?

Managing Infestation. In the end, that’s what this plan, such as it is, does — it simply manages infestation and destruction. It’s not prevention, or cure, but a passive response to a serious problem. I’m sure referring to it as a passive response will produce consternation among some bureaucrats. Yet, that’s all these two-dozen vague pages are — not a plan, but a resignation to loss.

There’s all the zeal in the world, to defend every last bureaucratic action as above reproach, but not so nearly much for hard work that would justify a reputation for industry and dedication.

Whitewater deserves a municipal plan as committed and dedicated to conservation as are so many of her residents.

This isn’t it.