Update on Glyphosate Proposed Use in Stamford

Myself and others attended the Select board meeting last night to try
and get further information on the herbicide use and logging operations
that are planned for our town. The Select board was receptive of
our inquires and have provided the information made available to their board on this matter (see below). Please read as much of the information as you can, as one resident stated last night, “This probably won’t be the last time we have to face issues like this”.

Three things I learned at the meeting were:
1) GMF can do whatever they want on the land they manage in Stamford regardless of how residents feel their actions may impact the town.
2) The logging operations are currently scheduled to only occur during the winter.
3) The proposed herbicide application duration will not coincide with the logging operation duration.

Since the seeds of the invasive species are (according to research I have conducted) viable for 5 to 20 years; and in the case of Japanese Knotweed, without total eradication suppression either causes the plants to go dormant and return later or the plant can regenerate from the tiniest of remains – I have to ask does it make sense to apply a controversial herbicide on the upper elevations of town with little follow through for eradication and past year’s seeds already on the ground?

I’m not against the removal of invasive species, I do feel the risk/reward equation in this situation is out of balance.

Additional links:
GMF Risk Analysis For Stamford AppendixC_HerbicideRiskAssessmentSentToSelectBoard

Website of the company that provides risk assessment to GMF
SERA Inc

The Entire Risk Assessment Document For Glyphosate
United States Dept of Agriculture

 

3 thoughts on “Update on Glyphosate Proposed Use in Stamford”

  1. With friends like GMF, I am not sure we need enemies. Invasive species are bad, but if this chemicals poisons the aquifer at relatively high altitude, then we have replaced one problem with another. Aren’t there alternative ways of discouraging these invasive species? I have had some luck using citric acid on weeds. I lime the area after the weeds are gone to restore PH balance. Perhaps my method is not practicable for these invasive species, but I would hope other remedies could be studied.

  2. I have to say, after reading the information that the selectboard was kind enough to provide, I’m even more concerned. GMF is fully aware there is a rare species of butterfly lives in one section they want to treat. They also admit that the herbicides will be applied close to a couple of wetland locations.

    Given that this job is being put out for bid, and we won’t know the expertise of the winning bidder until it’s too late, I’m very skeptical about the herbicides will be applied correctly and safely. (Note the recent paving and sidewalk jobs in town that had to be redone because of shoddy work as examples.)

    Also, as was brought up at the meeting last night, if the logging operation is going to be going on in the dead of winter anyway, why does this herbicide project even need to be done? What good is it going to do?

    Too many questions.

  3. The Selectboard is going to attempt to setup a meeting in Stamford so residents can ask their questions directly to GMF. I’ll post that information if/when it becomes available.

    As for an alternative, given the relatively minor attempt to curtail the invasive species, I would think burning would be just as effective for the short term goals of this effort. There appears to be 3 windows of time where remediation is more effective – spring because most of these species emerge before the native ground cover (which gives the invasives their advantage); Mid-summer when these plants begin sending nutrition to their roots for the winter; and November/December when most invasives still have foliage but the natives do not.

Comments are closed.