Forestry Program
Overview of Herbicide Use
in Private and State Forests

Native vegetation growing in a clearcut, killed
by herbicides
California's pesticide use, notification, and
reporting system is often touted as the most stringent in
the
nation. The actual implementation of this system, however,
is far less effective than a glance at the laws would
suggest. Most pesticide applications do not require
permits, public notice, or public review. Adherence to
label requirements as approved by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency is regarded as equivalent to obtaining
required permits.
Herbicides Often Used After Clearcutting
In the redwood region of northwestern California,
the timber industry is the primary user of herbicides. In 1999 and
2000, Humboldt County's four largest timber companies sprayed
20,463 acres with forestry herbicides. These chemicals are
used after clearcutting to kill broad-leaved trees and
shrubs. Clearcutting, one of several silvicultural
practices referred to as "even-aged management,"
involves the removal of all or most trees, often followed by
burning of the debris and spraying with herbicides to kill
plants that compete with conifer seedlings. Herbicides are
sometimes used to reduce the spread of invasive exotics, but
native vegetation is the main focus of timber company spray
plans. Many of the targeted species are ecologically
important pioneer native plants such as tanoak, madrone,
manzanita, alder, and ceanothus, which stabilize and replenish
disturbed and depleted soils.
Permits and Public Notification
Although permits are required for restricted
materials such as 2,4-D, the use of non-restricted herbicides
(e.g. triclopyr,
glyphosate, and sulfometuron) is governed only by pesticide use
reporting laws. These laws require applicators to file
reports of amounts used and acres sprayed with county
agricultural departments after spraying is
completed. These reports are public, but are typically are
not accessible for 6-12 months after completion of
spraying. The use of spray adjuvants - including up to
40 gallons of diesel or kerosene per acre - is not reported.
Projects that would have significant impacts
to the environment typically require potential impacts to
be addressed
in an Environmental Impact Report. However, public input
procedures are complicated by the fact that the pesticide
regulation system is a certified regulatory program under CEQA,
with the County Agricultural Commissioners as Lead
Agencies. For a regulatory program to be CEQA-certified,
certain requirements must be met, including public notification,
public review, and response to public comment.
Notification and public review are important CEQA requirements
because they allow concerned individuals to submit comments on
herbicide impacts to sensitive plant and animal species,
drinking water sources, and other resources. The current
pesticide regulation system does not appear to adequately
address these important CEQA requirements.
Lack of Agency Responsibility
CNPS has been unable to find a regulatory agency
that is willing to take responsibility for addressing the
impacts of
herbicides to rare, threatened, and endangered plants on and
adjacent to private industrial timberlands in California.
Nor have we been able to find a process which allows us to
review herbicide use proposals or provide public comment on
them, as required by CEQA. The Department of Pesticide
Regulation, which oversees pesticide regulation in California,
has told local conservationists that the California Department
of Forestry (CDF) is responsible for addressing cumulative
effects of forestry herbicide use. However, CDF claims
that herbicide use does not have to be addressed in timber
harvest plans, since it is not a "reasonably
foreseeable" part of logging operations. This is
difficult to understand because in Humboldt County, nearly every
clearcut is treated with one or more herbicide applications.
CDF's reluctance to include herbicide impacts in timber
harvest plan analyses means that known rare plant occurrences
are not addressed in timber-related herbicide application
planning processes, even when protections are required during
logging operations.
In recent years, implementation of CEQA disclosure
and mitigation measures that protect sensitive plants on
private
timberlands have improved substantially, resulting in
pre-disturbance field surveys. When sensitive species are
found, mitigation measures typically call for buffer zones
intended to protect the plants during logging operations.
But after the logging is completed, the slash is scraped into
piles and burned, commercial tree seedlings are planted, and
herbicides are sprayed to eliminate plants that compete with the
conifer seedlings. Special buffer zones erected to protect
the rare plants during logging operations do not protect them
from herbicide impacts, because those buffers are not enforced
during herbicide application.
Native Plants Not Adequately Protected
Until processes for public notification, public review,
response to public comments, and consultation with appropriate
regulatory agencies regarding impacts of herbicides are
incorporated into timber harvest planning, native plants,
including those that are rare, endangered or threatened, on
millions of acres of private timberlands will remain unprotected
from herbicide impacts.
|