The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS) witchweed [Striga asiatica (L.) Kuntze] eradication program in North and South Carolina recently passed the 50-yr milestone. This program has been remarkable in both duration and level of success, so to mark this anniversary a symposium was held during the 2011 Weed Science Society of America (WSSA) Annual Conference in Portland, OR. The occasion was used as a retrospective on a remarkable eradication effort, an opportunity to take stock of progress on controlling other parasitic plants, and a look to the future. From 11 presentations in the symposium, seven papers were produced and are presented in the following pages. Taken together, they present a picture of especially challenging weed problems that continue to fuel development of a wide variety of control approaches. Parasitic weeds are an enduring challenge in much of the world and a continual threat to the United States. Their close physical and physiological connections to their hosts make them nearly impossible to control by manual cutting or pulling, and few chemicals are able to specifically control the parasites without injuring the host crop. The full extent of the parasitic weed problem was reviewed by Chris Parker (‘‘Parasitic Weeds—A World Challenge’’), who discussed damage inflicted by parasites and presented updated distribution maps for the major weedy parasitic species, a nice addition since one of the frustrating aspects of parasitic plant science is the lack of accurate distribution information and yield impact data on parasites. In contrast to the situation in the Carolinas where the witchweed population is in decline, it is clear that on a global basis the problem of parasitic weeds is as great as ever. The U.S. witchweed eradication program has been one of the greatest success stories in parasitic weed control. Witchweed is a native of Africa and was first discovered in the United States in North Carolina in 1956. The destructive nature of the weed prompted the federal government to impose quarantine restrictions on infested land in 1957, with the ambitious goal of completely eradicating witchweed from the United States. From a historic high of more than 174,824 ha (Iverson et al. 2011), the infestation has now been reduced to less than 1% of the original infested area. At the end of 2009 South Carolina released its last acres from quarantine, while North Carolina has just over 809 ha still in the active program. Although a description of the work that went into the eradication program was presented during the symposium, it does not appear in the following proceedings because it was recently published in a separate manuscript by Iverson et al. (2011). Nevertheless, some aspects of the program are worth highlighting here and it was clear from the presentations that the Whiteville APHIS station (which served as the headquarters of the eradication effort) became an incubator for creative weed control ideas. For example, the research staff developed the use of ethylene gas to stimulate suicidal germination of parasite seed (still the only example of weed control by selective triggering of seed germination), they developed a device for purifying seed from soil samples to assess contamination level, and they developed the rope wick technology for applying herbicides. They also developed scouting procedures and a point-based system for determining when a field could be safely released from quarantine, developing a model for weed eradication programs. In addition to witchweed, the broomrape genera Orobanche and Phelipanche threaten the United States. Oregon (at a site not far from the WSSA conference) has faced the most recent and widespread occurrence of broomrape in the United States, and Carol Mallory-Smith described the response to this outbreak of small broomrape in clover fields (‘‘Small Broomrape [Orobanche minor] in Oregon and the 3 Rs: Regulation, Research, and Reality’’). Unlike the massive response leading to quarantine and eradication efforts for witchweed in the Carolinas, the response to broomrape in Oregon has been less aggressive and it appears likely that lack of resolve in containing this infestation will lead to spread of small broomrape. The difficulties in controlling parasitic weeds necessitate new and creative solutions, so part of the symposium was devoted to looking ahead to the best emerging strategies for controlling parasites. Potentially effective methods include herbicides for which crop selectivity has been attained through resistance breeding, as for the imidazolinone-resistant (IR) corn described by Joel Ransom (‘‘Herbicide Applied to IRMaize as a Striga Control Option for Small-Scale African Farmers’’). In this case IR maize is not injured by imazapyr applications to seeds, which then kills young attached witchweed. This technology is being promoted in Tanzania and other parts of Africa. Herbicide applications for parasite control need to be well calibrated and Hanan Eizenberg discussed precision agriculture applications to broomrape control (‘‘Technologies for Smart Chemical Control of Broomrape [Orobanche spp. and Phelipanche spp.]’’). Increased ability to predict parasite development and employment of geographical information technology to map field infestations will enhance grower ability to control parasites. A better understanding of parasite biology may also contribute to new control methodologies and Jim Westwood signaled the beginning of the genomics era for parasitic weeds with a presentation on an effort to sequence expressed genes from Striga hermonthica (Del.) Benth. and Orobanche aegyptiaca (Pers.) (‘‘The Parasitic Plant Genome Project: New Tools for Understanding the Biology of Orobanche and Striga’’). It is expected that availability of sequences for these species will substantially accelerate research into understanding parasite growth and identifying new targets for control. DOI: 10.1614/WS-D-12-00003.1 * National Program Manager (Biological Control & Noxious Weeds), U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 15612 Wembrough St., Silver Spring, MD 20905; Associate Professor, Department of Plant Pathology, Physiology and Weed Science, Virginia Tech, 401 Latham Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061. Corresponding author’s E-mail: westwood@vt.edu Weed Science 2012 60:267–268