The Strongroup & WhiteMoose

[Andrew Brown]

Below is a list of annotated documents that I've found in regards to the topic of alternative vegetation management techniques. Most have links, but I've got the documents for the rest if you need them.

ab


Quebec

Fortier et Messier paper (in docs)
Chart comparing impacts of herbicides vs mechanical brushing on different aspects of the ecosystem. A useful overview of mechanical treatments.


http://www.mrnf.gouv.qc.ca/forets/protection/protection-strategie.jsp
Forest protection strategy (to read)

Ontario

http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/mnr/forests/timberea/decision_pdfs/CHAPTER6.PDF
This chapter and others partially re: alternatives to vegetation management (and how they aren’t as effective as herbicides)

http://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/projects/196
Current research project with Doug Pitt.


“Cutting versus herbicides: Tenth-year volume and release cost-effectiveness of sub-boreal conifer plantations� by Jason E.E. Dampier1,2, F. Wayne Bell3, Michel St-Amour4, Douglas G. Pitt5and Nancy J. Luckai1
This study looked at the cost effectiveness of cutting methods vs aerial applications of herbicides. The latter was found to be three times as cost effective.



Manitoba

http://www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/forestry/forest-renewal/techniques/fr16-vegmgmt.html
Current vegetation management information from Manitoba. No mention of alternatives to herbicides; mostly information on what permits someone would need and different options for using herbicides.

http://www.manitobamodelforest.net
Manitoba Model Forest: have done research on alternative vegetation management practices in the climate/conditions of Manitoba. Both of the best alternatives from their research involved the use of herbicides on the ground. The research found that on the ground spraying worked best at one site and a brush saw worked best on the other (“a mechanical treatment, a small circular saw, powered by a small gas motor, is used to make a clean cut of competing stems. This is followed by application of the herbicide Glyphosate (Vision) to the stumps.�)
Docs: “Manitoba_model_forest� and

Saskatchewan

Correspondance underway with Shannon Poppy (Agroforestry specialist with the Saskatchewan Forest Centre)

Alberta

“Forest Management in Alberta� – CPAWS, July 12, 2005

http://www.cpaws-edmonton.org/factsheets/State_of_Forest_Mgmt_in_AB.pdf

- Objective 19: “Hinton West Fraser is the only company that does not use herbicides operationally, but they are experimenting to evaluate their use.�, but table shows otherwise…
- Pg 33: table lists companies operating in Alberta and whether they use pesticides




British Columbia

Ministry of Forests and Range – Forest Practices Branch
Silviculture/Vegetation management
http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/silviculture/index.htm
and their publications
http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/meta/publications.htm

publications specifically re: vegetation management
http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hre/topics/brushing.htm


Sheep Project
http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/silviculture/sheep/index.htm

- forest plantation brushing with sheep - 2005 report
o http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/silviculture/sheep/ShGzSum2005.pdf
- “Sheep Grazing in Forestry�
o http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/publications/00127/SN26.pdf
o Cheaper than manual brushing, more expensive than aerial spray


bc_herbicide_field_handbook; lists some alternatives for applicators to consider



Nation wide research

http://www.afs-journal.org/index.php?option=article&access=standard&Itemid=129&url=/articles/forest/pdf/2003/07/F3712.pdf
*** need more long term studies re herbicide efficiency, lists many of the alternatives.


http://nfdp.ccfm.org/compendium/pest/tables_index_e.php
National Forestry Database Program – tables re provincial distribution of herbicide spraying.

http://www.glfc.forestry.ca/cfpm/CFPMHome.cfm?language=English
Canadian Forest Management Database – over 10,000 scientific studies. Over a thousand having to do with vegetation management.

International:

Sweden:

http://www.borealforest.org/world/world_sweden.htm
overview of Swedish forest industry. Some links at the bottom

http://www.forestindustries.se/LitiumInformation/site/page.asp?Page=16&IncPage=712&Destination=712
Swedish forest industry group. Some potentially useful docs.


http://www.sfws.auburn.edu/sfnmc/class/lsu.html
“In 1985, Sweden established a goal to reduce the amount of active ingredient of pesticides used (about 75% of which are herbicides) by one-half in five years. This program was very successful. Use of low-dose compounds, such as the sulfonylurea herbicides, and improved application equipment were the main reasons for this successful reduction.
It is interesting that although the amount of pesticide used dropped by 50%, the total area treated increased during the same period. In 1990 the Swedish Parliament passed a bill establishing another 50 percent reduction of pesticide use by 1997. The Netherlands followed Sweden's lead in 1989, setting a goal of 50% reduction in use of pesticides by the year 2000. Denmark has also passed a similar resolution. New legislation was also introduced in Sweden that all pesticides must be re-registered every five years. This removed many 1960's and 1970's chemicals from the market, and was aimed at assuring the latest chemical technology on the market. This assurance of latest chemical technology will come at a cost, however, since this reregistration process is expensive. Similar principles are being applied in the province of Ontario, Canada, for agricultural crops, and there is a move to eliminate the use of pesticides in the forest.�

http://www.beyondpesticides.org/news/daily_news_archive/2003/9_23_03.htm
Article re: glyphosate ban in Denmark as of September 15th, 2003 and some links to health data.

www.borealforest.org

Green Web


Municipalities

Mike Christie’s (from Ottawa) list of Canadian municipalities that have banned the use of pesticides. Last updated on October 1st, 2007. Found at: http://www.healthyenvironmentforkids.ca/english/resources/card_file.shtml?x=915
National:

Canadian Partnership for Children’s Health and Environment
http://www.healthyenvironmentforkids.ca/english/special_collections/fulltext.shtml?x=787
Information on municipal pesticide bylaws, and health effects of pesticides.



Other Alternatives:

http://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/projects/182
Research re: right of ways, so not sure if applicable to forestry. “Vegetation management alternatives: Collaborative work with research personnel from the provinces has been instrumental in providing forestry and rights-of-way managers with non-herbicide alternatives to woody vegetation control. Chondrostereum purpureum (Cp), a naturally occurring fungus that infects woody plants, was demonstrated in a nation-wide efficacy trial to provide measurable control of the prolific resprouting that typically occurs following manual brushing. Cp is now Canada's first registered biological vegetation management tool. Additionally, mid summer cutting, at a stem height just below live crown, proved to be the optimum strategy for minimizing coppice growth of aspen following manual cutting. Several investigations compare the efficacy of manual cutting to other vegetation management alternatives.�






Other Efforts

Sierra Club of Canada – Atlantic Chapter; “Stop the Spray�
http://www.sierraclub.ca/atlantic/programs/wildspaces/stopthespray/action.htm

Lobbying and encouraging people to write letters to legislature. Website includes links to:
- Toolkit for drafting pesticide by-laws, and tons of information on the chemicals themselves and health studies (http://www.sierraclub.ca/atlantic/programs/healthycommunities/pesticides/frame1.htm)
- List of common pesticides and their impact on health and environment; useful works cited section (http://www.healthyenvironmentforkids.ca/img_upload/13297cd6a147585a24c1c6233d8d96d8/impacts_1.pdf)


Science docs:

http://bookstore.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/detail_e.php?catalog=20617
Natural resources Canada document re: research on wild blueberries and raspberries after glyphosate spray in boreal forest. Found that above max allowable standard. Need to buy.

http://www.gene.ch/genet/2003/Jul/msg00072.html
Article(s) about glyphosate leaching into groundwater in Denmark.


http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/meta/publications.htm#019
BC forestry docs re health impacts of pesticides, especially for forestry workers.

http://www.forrex.org/program/water/PDFs/wmbib/FPAndPhysicalChemWQ.PDF
HUGE bibliography re: the effects of forestry practices on water quality



Kjær, J., Ullum, M., Olsen, P. & Grant, R. 2005: Leaching of glyphosate and amino-methylphosphonic acid from Danish agricultural field sites. Journal of Environmental Quality 34 (2), 608-620.

Newmaster, S.G., D.H. Vitt, and F.W. Bell. 1999. The effects of triclopyr and glyphosate on common bryophytes and lichens in Northwestern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 29: 1101-1111.

[TogetherWeStand]

Pesticide Action Network Updates Service (PANUPS)

See PANUPS updates service, for complete information.

Herbicides to Fight Forest Fires?
September 13, 2002

The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) has approved a plan to spray the herbicides glyphosate and triclopyr on nearly 5,000 acres of timberland to reduce the risk of catastrophic forest fire. The project area lies within the Eldorado National Forest, watershed of the San Francisco Bay Area and point of origin for Bay Area drinking water. The Plantation Protection Fuels Project is the first time the Forest Service has proposed to use herbicides for fire reduction; herbicides are commonly applied by USFS and private timber companies during tree planting projects to lessen competition for new seedlings. However, in the Eldorado National Forest, the herbicides will be applied among mature trees--in this case 40 to 60 year old Douglas Firs--that support a variety of wildlife. The California Indian Basketweavers Association (CIBA) and Sierrans for Safe Passage (SSP) have appealed the Forest Service decision on the grounds that use of herbicides for fire fuels reduction is an environmentally dangerous new precedent and is hazardous for both people and wildlife. The groups argue that use of mechanical brush cutters and thinning are the appropriate tools to use.

"The Forest Service has really gone too far with this proposal," said Vivian Parker, biologist for the California Indian Basketweavers Association. "They want to turn the forest floor into a sterile dead zone, killing valuable native shrubs and herbs on 4,522 acres of publicly owned lands. These native plants provide important food, nesting material and shelter for many species, including black bear, quail and deer. Use of brush cutters is more than adequate to provide brush control, without risking contamination of our streams, poisoning culturally valuable plants, and injuring native wildlife. This proposal makes no ecological, scientific or moral sense."

The conservation groups also disagree with the Forest Service assumption that spraying of herbicides will reduce fire danger, "After two treatments, the amount of surface fuels will be the same, irrespective of the treatment used," said Dan Zimmerman, of Sierrans for Safe Passage. "The truth is, herbicides will actually increase the short term fire danger due to the dead stems and foliage left behind. Mastication shreds the surface fuels, laying them down and speeding up the decomposition process."

The Forest Service has proposed herbicide use despite several recent court rulings requiring more thorough assessment of the impacts. Californians for Alternatives to Toxics (CATS) filed a suit against USFS for the Cottonwood Project’s plan to use herbicides on 22,000 acres of Tahoe National Forest after the 1994 Cottonwood forest fire. In that case, a federal judge ruled that the agency had failed to consider adequately the effects on human health and wildlife from herbicides, which may act as endocrine disruptors, neurotoxins and immune system suppressors.

Two other cases have brought the weight of the federal courts to bear on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which is charged with regulating pesticide use, but has yet to evaluate the full impacts of forestry herbicides on wildlife which has been listed as threatened or endangered. The courts have asked EPA to perform this evaluation in consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and develop a mitigation plan for herbicide use in areas with endangered species.

"These same problems are at issue in the Eldorado National Forest project," Parker said. "No one knows what the real effects are from the widespread use of herbicides in our forests. In fact, most laboratory studies have focused only on the lethal effects from ingestion. They seldom have looked at the more subtle effects of these products on eggs and sperm, developing embryos or on juvenile organisms. However, recent laboratory studies have shown that even infinitesimally small amounts of some herbicides used commonly in forestry can have devastating effects on the ability of frogs and other amphibians to reproduce successfully."

Use of herbicides also frequently results in an increase in aggressive non-native or noxious weed outbreaks. According to Parker of CIBA, EPA has not considered the potential impact on California Indians who still use national forest system lands for gathering food, for hunting and fishing, for basket plant materials, and for ceremonial purposes.

The Forest Service plans in the Eldorado National Forest bear continued scrutiny. As a result of the CIBA/SSP appeal, the plan is under review by the Regional Forester for Region 5. A decision is expected by October 10, 2002.

Sources: California Indian Basketweavers, Sierrans for Safe Passage press release, August 19, 2002 and U.S. Forest Service, Region 5, Plantation Protection Fuels Project, http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/eldorado.

Contact: Vivian Parker, Resource Policy Analyst, The California Indian Basketweavers Association, P.O. Box 2397, Nevada City, CA 95959; phone (530) 622-8718; email vparker@innercite.com; Web site http://www.ciba.org or Dan Zimmerman, Environmental Investigator, Sierrans for Safe Passage, phone (530) 477-6510.

PANUPS is a weekly email news service providing resource guides and reporting on pesticide issues that don't always get coverage by the mainstream media. It's produced by Pesticide Action Network North America, a non-profit and non-governmental organization working to advance sustainable alternatives to pesticides worldwide.

You can join our efforts! We gladly accept donations for our work and all contributions are tax deductible in the United States. Visit http://www.panna.org/donate.
_________________
North,South, East, and West are connected ... Protect the North.