Sign-on letter to be sent to San Mateo Board of Directors
San Mateo County Board of Supervisors 400 County Center, 1st Floor Redwood City, CA 94063
Re: San Mateo County Pesticide Use Documentation, Transparency, Oversight Committee, and Transition to Regenerative Land Management
Dear Honorable Members of the San Mateo Board of Supervisors:
As citizens living next to and using trails at the Golden Gate National Recreation Area GGNRA and San Mateo County Parks for recreation, we request the following transparency and potential implementations of Pesticide use to create awareness for public and pet health concerns. Such that the citizens can adjust their activity accordingly regarding exposure of themselves and loved ones especially if they have health conditions such as suppressed immunity or asthma.
We hope the Board of Supervisors can write a letter or speak in person with the GGNRA since your constituents have been affected by their spraying of glyphosate and the leaving of fuel load in the wildland urban interface back in June and July 2023. We have discovered it is the practice of both GGNRA and San Mateo County Parks to regularly spray certain invasive plants with glyphosate and leave them to degrade, yet they become fuel load.
First and foremost, this is a public health concern, and it affects fuel load, watershed, the health of our very sensitive ecosystems that are all connected via land and water, and climate resilience since these things are all connected. In a time of mass extinction and climate change, we should NOT be chronically applying poisons to the land, especially in the name of habitat preservation.
We have also discovered it is impossible to know how much pesticides are being used in the Parks due to the ambiguous way they are being tracked at the County Agriculture Weights and Measures. Tracking of chemical quantity applied is lumped all into one general of location called San Mateo County. The Parks, County public lands, and private lands are not separated out. Specific application sites/locations are not specified or named. In addition, the target pest/plant, and type of application are not named. Therefore, use of pesticides is not transparent to the public.
Glyphosate alone is failing as a tool and has become a liability. Some businesses are losing their insurance coverage because of the hundred millions in law suits if someone gets sick from it. See link here where a golf course (big user of pesticides and entrenched in the Bayer Rewards Program) stopped using glyphosate due to liability. In addition, the weeds are becoming resistant to these herbicides. See recent article here.
It is surprising that we are still using glyphosate and other pesticides in San Mateo County. We have tools that work without pesticides. Many municipalities are successful with using alternatives to pesticides or “organics only” and can provide working policy examples. Some of these municipalities are listed below.
In cooperation with Non-Toxic Neighborhoods, this is what we propose for the SMC Parks and all San Mateo County public lands:
TRANSITION TO REGENERATIVE LAND MANAGEMENT (RLM): This is a work in progress (or living policy) of moving off toxic pesticide use with goals to reduce and eventually eliminate it while gradually incorporating principles of Regenerative Land Management to regenerate soil thereby improving rain infiltration and water retention which will help keep the land hydrated, aquifers full, create more carbon capture, reduce flooding/erosion, and climate/fire resilience.
The transition off pesticide application would be tracked with clear records and annual reports and an oversight committee keeping the whole transition process and continued adherence accountable. The end goal is: using only organic pesticides when necessary (which are NOT part of any vendor rewards programs), working efficiently with volunteer groups to enhance manual work (including applying Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) in cooperation with Indigenous land stewards if they are willing), using alternatives to pesticides, and where possible using regenerative soil management techniques to keep the soils healthy. This is a shift in how we view the land: from one of domination and control of the land to working in harmony with ecosystem services of the land to help it thrive. We would be moving away from chemically dependent land management. Here are the basic parts of our ASKS:
I. NOTIFICATION: of pesticide application to the public (more specific and clear) a. Specific and advanced public posted notice (at least one week before and one week after) of Pesticide application.
Dates of application and keep dates updated if they change
List chemical name, brand name of pesticide, EPA registration number
Description of ‘treatment’ or application (spray or paint), dilution
Name of target pest/plant
Continue to provide reasoning, but add for specific plant/chemical (public education)
Continue to post on the website for anyone or group field trips that need to be planned in advance.
7. Posting should be consistent, factual, onsite, and timely at the site of Pesticide application not just at the trailhead and not posted when not happening in the timeline above.
II. TRANSPARENCY: keeping more specific pesticide application records and an ANNUAL REPORT.
The public should have easy website access to Regenerative Land Management (RLM) records (which separate out County Parks, County public lands and private lands), policies, specific procedures, and an annual report. Private lands are not of interest but should be separated out or not included in public land pesticide application records.
1. Records should continue to include a monthly report of pesticide Use for San Mateo County, but records should be distinguishable so that one can find records with sum totals of use just for San Mateo County Parks which would include all SMC Parks and contractor use, and separate sum totals of use for other County public lands.
2. All contractor names should be updated and listed on the RLM section of the website, since one must know names of contractors in order to request records from Agriculture Weights and Measures. 3. Records should continue to include date of application, name of pesticide applied, EPA registration number, and quantity used. In addition, it should include: target pest/plant, type of application (ex: spray or paint), dilution used, approximate square footage where work was done, and location applied using GPS coordinates on google maps. Some of this data is currently collected by contractors but not available to public records.
3. Record tracking requirements could be revised at Agriculture Weights and Measures or the County could create their own database linked to or on the County website where pesticide application data is tracked and available for public access.
4. All RLM Policies and Procedures for the Parks and other County public lands should be posted on County and Park websites along with the annual reports for the Parks and County Public lands so the public can access this information at any time.
5. The annual reports for Parks and the rest of the County could be included together in one document and should account for the total sum of all Pesticides (by name) used for the year, broken down into County Parks use, and the rest of the County public land use (not private land). It should show and explain percent use and changes in use of pesticides compared to previous years.
III. ACCOUNTABILITY: create an pesticide oversight committee to track policy, records, and the annual report.
Implementation of an RLM Oversight Committee or Task Force for San Mateo County which will oversee all County public lands including County Parks. The Oversight Committee will meet quarterly to review RLM records, policy, annual reports when applicable and work on ways the County can gradually reduce application of poisons on the land while finding ways to regenerate the soil where appropriate.
Individuals that should be involved include concerned community members, technical experts (regenerative or holistic grazing, alternatives to pesticide experts), local advocates opposed to chemical use on the land, elected official(s), and staff. Persons who should NOT be on the committee are anyone who has a financial stake in the outcomes of committee decisions or other motivations to continue pesticide use (ex: anyone including staff receiving cash back rewards from chemical suppliers, chemical suppliers, chemical industry employees, industry based ‘environmental’ organizations that are motivated to continue pesticide use as a ‘tool’...etc.)
IV. START AN ALTERNATIVES TO PESTICIDE PILOT WITH THE GUIDANCE OF NON-TOXIC NEIGHBORHOODS
V. IMPLEMENT A STAFF, LANDSCAPER AND 3rd PARTY CONTRACT TO PREVENT THEM FROM BENEFITING FROM FINANCIAL INCENTIVES OR USING VENDOR REWARDS PROGRAMS (Bayer-Envu Rewards Program that rewards personal visa gift cards based on level of purchase) THAT MOTIVATE THE PURCHASE OF PESTICIDES (We have wording for this type of contract and we can share with the County) We don’t know if this is happening in our County, but this is a worldwide problem, so it should be prevented or stopped it in case it is happening.
SMC RESOLUTION: #071857 from the minutes of the March 13, 2012 Board of Supervisors meeting which documents the vote that no broadcast spraying of pesticides/herbicides will be sprayed on the roadsides or in the Parks.
1. Please define the difference between broadcast spraying and spraying happening in the Parks.
2. We would like documentation of this resolution and easy website access.
CONSIDER ALTERNATIVES:
1. Consider what other counties and cities are doing to reduce or eliminate pesticide use in parks and open space such as organic non-selective herbicides and targeted and rotational grazing. (See below listed examples.) Consider measure K, grants, or Park funds for these climate resilience and fire resilience land management methods.
2. Organize Volunteers: We request San Mateo County, SMC County Parks, and the GGNRA utilize and organize volunteers for manual labor and/or grazing goats where pesticides are currently being applied. An example is an ‘Adopt A Park/Trail’ program as done in Burbank. Youth groups take ownership of a park and its non-chemical management. Burbank even provides awards to the most weeds “properly” removed (by weight). These types of programs can build community and enhance volunteer services.
We appreciate your consideration and your willingness to do what is best to enhance the health and climate resiliency of our Parks.
Respectfully,
-Melinda MacNaughton, El Granada Advocates
-Patty Mayall, Protect Our Watershed SMC
(On Behalf of concerned citizens of the Coastside Community)
-Kim Konte, Founder of Non-Toxic Neighborhoods
_________________________
cc: San Mateo County Executive Officer/Clerk of the Board Mike Callagy, San Mateo County Attorney John Nibbelin
San Mateo County Assistant Attorney David A Silberman
____________________________________
Municipalities Using Alternatives to Pesticides:
How Irvine became Non-Toxic with the help of Kim Konte at Non-Toxic Neighborhoods
Example Annual Reports:
Irvine County
Clear IPM Website Examples:
Irvine County
Example Resolution/Ordinances/Bans:
Humbolt County Board of Supervisors Resolution Opposing Spraying of Herbicides
Windsor City Council Resolution to Discontinues the Use of all Pesticides