Current work in wildlife, rivers, public lands, and climate

Saturday, February 25, 2006
Foes of Plan to Kill Weeds Win Appeal

Environmentalists opposed to herbicide use in the Santa Fe and Carson national forests have won their appeal of a government plan to kill off invasive weeds
Contact: John Arnold Albuquerque Journal

Environmentalists opposed to herbicide use in the Santa Fe and Carson national forests have won their appeal of a government plan to kill off invasive weeds.

In a decision issued Friday, deputy regional forester Lucia M. Turner said the Santa Fe and Carson national forests’ Invasive Weed Control Project- in the works since 2000- does not address the state Environment Department’s concern about the use of the herbicide picloram in municipal watersheds.

Also, according to Turner, the plan does not adequately address cumulative environmental effects on wildlife, and it needs to further analyze population data for the white-tailed ptarmigan, a state-protected bird found at high elevations.

However, Turner noted that her decision to reverse the forests’ approval of the project does not mean that herbicides are inappropriate for controlling noxious weeds.

The plan, in fact, “appears to be the most efficient and effective means to control invasive weeds and should accomplish the purpose and need of the project,” Turner explained in her decision.

A Santa Fe National Forest spokeswoman said Friday that project planners would work to address Turner’s decision but that she did not have a timetable for doing so.

“It’s not a setback,” said spokeswoman Delores Maese. “It just means we have some work ahead of us.”

The Santa Fe and Carson national forest officials approved the weed control plan in September, but eight people- backed by more than 20 environmental groups and individuals- appealed that decision to the Forest Service’s regional office in Albuquerque.

Wild Watershed founder Sam Hitt, an appellant in the case, acknowledged that his group and others won their appeals on “a set of narrow issues.” But he said Turner’s decision allows opponents of the plan another chance to press their case for alternative, nontoxic weed control measures.

“The real victory here is another chance for the public to voice their concerns,” Hitt said.

The Santa Fe and Carson national forests’ plan would use both toxic and nontoxic methods to target more than 7,300 acres of nonnative plant populations over the next decade. The biggest invaders, according to the Forest Service, are nonnative thistles, followed by valley bottom species of saltcedar, Siberian elm and Russian olive trees.

Forest Service officials have said the herbicides they plan to use are regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency, would be carefully applied and pose little threat to humans and wildlife.

Appellants say they understand the importance of controlling weeds, which push out native plants, increase erosion and can degrade wildlife habitat. But herbicides do pose health risks, they say. Opponents were especially concerned about a part of the plan that would essentially lift an 18-year ban on the use of herbicides in the Santa Fe and Las Vegas municipal watersheds.

In 2004, the state Environment Department weighed in on the issue, expressing concern over the “relatively high risk to human health related to application of herbicides within municipal watersheds… “

The state agency suggested that additional precautions, including prohibition of herbicides like picloram, might be needed in the watersheds. Picloram is typically used to kill broad-leafed plants.

“The (Santa Fe and Carson national forests) never considered the effects of this persistent, toxic herbicide in the water supply of Santa Fe,” Hitt said. “It was a complete omission. It wasn’t that they didn’t address it adequately. They just didn’t consider it at all.”

Copyright 2006 Albuquerque Journal – Reprinted with permission