Knapweed
After considerable discussion with members of the public, the county board voted Tuesday, August 18, 2009 to deny County Engineer/Agricultural Inspector Shae Kosmalski’s request for permission to obtain quotes on spraying for noxious weeds. Kosmalski told the board she was trying to do her job as “ag” inspector, which requires that she make sure the county controls noxious weeds. Local citizens brought up strong objections, however, to the application of chemicals to control noxious weeds.
Kosmalski recommended treatment on 13 acres along county rights-of-way not already treated by the U.S. Forest Service. She recommended focusing on roads, trailheads, gravel pits, and parking lots. Eleven invasive species have been identified by the state as dangerous, she said.
MN Statute 18.75 states, “It is the policy of the legislature that residents of the state be protected from the injurious effects of noxious weeds on public health, the environment, public roads, crops, livestock, and other property.”
Bob LaMettry said he assumed the goal was control rather than eradication. Kosmalski said yes, control is the goal, especially with knapweed and purple loosestrife, although funding will affect how much they can do. Biological control methods, such as certain kinds of bugs, are being studied but are still in the testing stage, she said. Noxious weed herbicides are selectively bred, she said, and don’t target all plants.
LaMettry asked if lupines were on the state’s list of nox- ious weeds. Kosmalski replied by saying that they are not on the primary list but may be on the secondary list.
LaMettry said the U.S. Forest Service has issued warnings to blueberry pickers, and he is worried that spray could drift into gardens and areas where children play. The bids specify that spraying cannot be done under windy conditions, Kosmalski answered, and contractors would be liable for any damages under its control. She said she would be obtaining technical advice and inspecting the spraying closely.
”
“It’s a lot more serious than everyone realizes,” said Marco Good. Given the limited effectiveness of weed control, he said, “I think it’s a waste of our time, a waste of our money, and a waste of our resources.” He stated that herbicides have been linked to cancer in animals, Parkinson’s in adults, and diseases in children.
Good referred to Harmon Seaver, who shot at a U.S. Forest Service plane that was dropping herbicide near his property off Murmur Creek Road back in the 1970s. Good said, “He felt his survival was threatened, and so do I.”
A homeowner should not have to request that spraying not be done on his or her property, Good continued. Even if the herbicide breaks down shortly after application, he said, a big rain could wash it into the watershed. “I consider it a terrible affront to our land and our people,” he said.
In a letter to the board, Good suggested several other methods of controlling invasive species. ” ‘Noxious’ weeds are not new to Cook County, nor to any place on Earth. Their control is best achieved by bringing the natural balance back to the land,” he wrote. “Knapweed will not grow on the forest floor after trees cover and shade it out. You can mow or burn the ditches and roadsides to keep the weeds from going to seed….”
“I know we have a problem with invasives,” Mike Schelmeske said. “I’d like to find another way to deal with it if possible.” He said that if spraying were done, he would like to see more signage and public information
so people
could avoid the areas being sprayed. He said he has neighbors who are extremely sensitive to chemicals and have had to make trips to the hospital because of chemicals in the air. We don’t always know the long-term effects of spraying herbicides, he said.
Ann Rosenquist and Saffron Straub wrote a letter to board chair Fritz Sobanja. “The ditches in Cook County are used for berry picking, hay making, four wheeling, and for running and hiding if you are a deer,” they wrote. “…Most herbicides never claim to cause cancer or reproductive problems or organ failure because of the extreme political power of these big chemical companies. If you look around in any industrial farming community where the use of Roundup is standard, you will see lots of cancers and other maladies. …Killing plants by chemicals is only going to pass through the entire food chain.”
Kosmalski handed out copies of a form property owners could fill out if they did not wish to have spraying done adjacent to their property. The form includes an agreement that the property owner would take responsibility for weeding and brushing the right-of-way prior to August 15 of each year.
Commissioner Sobanja expressed concern over people picking berries and dogs wandering through areas that were sprayed. Kosmalski said she could put signs up wherever the county board wanted them, although it would cost more money, as would mechanical control. She said she currently had one of her staff cutting thistles with a weed eater.
Does the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) have anything to say about chemical spraying? County Attorney Tim Scannell asked. The chemicals she was proposing to use, Kosmalski answered, have been approved by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. She wasn’t sure where the MPCA stood but could ask, she said.
Cook County Water Planning Coordinator Cindy Gentz said that the Minnesota Department of Agriculture recently reminded farmers and others that would be spraying to maintain a setback of 16 to 60 feet between pesticide applications and waterways.
Much of Cook County is considered wetland, Scannell said. He wondered if the state was providing oversight on chemical use near wetlands. Both the Cook County Economic Development Authority and the Highway Department have been fined for dirt that was carried into Lake Superior after heavy rains, he said. Could the county be getting fined only for runoff material that is visible?
“We’re one big drainage [area]” from the ridgeline to Lake Superior, Schelmeske said.
LaMettry suggested that pulling weeds would make a great sentenceto serve project. Kosmalski said some weeds sprout new plants from rhizomes that are activated when the top of the weed is pulled.
The county has an obligation to protect public health, Commissioner Bruce Martinson said.
Commissioner Sobanja said plants moving to new areas is a natural part of life on earth.
Commissioner Jim Johnson expressed concern about possible legal trouble with the MPCA if they spray.
County Extension Director Diane Booth said she was once a certified pesticide applicator. Make sure you have your facts straight, she said. While people were advocating both ways, “the truth is somewhere in the middle,” she said. Some farming communities have volunteers who pull weeds by hand. We do need to control invasive species, she said.
Invasive species change the forest ecosystem, Gentz said, and can do damage to the wilderness and change the type of vegetation in hayfields. A lot of invasive species take over native plant species that have deeper root systems and do a better job keeping soil in place.
Commissioner Bob Fenwick said he believes the county’s resources could be put to better use. He made a motion, seconded by Jim Johnson, not to put out bids for spraying. The motion passed unanimously.
In a separate email, Kosmalski responded to a question about the “worst-case scenario” with invasive species: “…The cost to control/ manage invasives will accelerate as time goes on. Other agencies spend a chunk of change on invasives control within our county each year. … And aesthetics is a big thing for this county. …[Knapweed] can be seen in Wisconsin – it’s a real problem and has taken over roadsides everywhere. In my role as agricultural inspector I am trying to take some action to keep our county from ending up like that. So now I’ll look to other means and research their effectiveness so we can do the best job we can.”
All county boards in Minnesota are required to appoint an agriculture inspector. MN Statute 18.78 states, “A person owning land, a person occupying land, or a person responsible for the maintenance of public land shall control or eradicate all noxious weeds on the land at a time and in a manner ordered by the county agricultural inspector or a local weed inspector.”
Leave a Reply