‘I’d rather my house burn down than get cancer’: Two California communities fight to save their forests: LA Times

 

 

We covered the Lassen  National Forest Dixie Post-Fire  herbicide issue as articulated by the Mother Jones article here. The article, and the people quoted, did not mention the restrictions easily found in the EA.

The LA Times has an interesting story comparing the views of Lake Tahoans to Butte County (Camp Fire) on that specific topic.. post-fire herbicide use. Shout-out to reporter Noah Haggerty for this report. Nice photos  as well.

Increasingly severe wildfires — fueled by climate change and more than a century of forest mismanagement — have forced an environmental reckoning on mountain towns nestled in California’s Sierra Nevada. Their residents face difficult questions: Will some kind of forest grow back? And, if not, should humans intervene to make that happen? Two communities, 100 miles apart, may be choosing different answers

*********

“I’ll never see it like it was in my entire lifetime, and we need to be OK with that,” said Madeline Moritsch, who spent summers at her parents’ Tahoe cabin growing up and now lives in town. “It’s really sad … to lose connection to the forest, but then also, it is part of the forest life cycle. I have great trust that the forest is going to do what it’s going to do.”

In the Tahoe basin, opposition to the herbicide reached a fever pitch after an article chronicling the Forest Service’s use of the chemical across California appeared in Mother Jones magazine.

The agency had posted newspaper notices and sent emails mentioning herbicide use and seeking public input last year, but Tahoe residents said they had missed them or didn’t make much of them.

“We continue to welcome feedback from community members and appreciate the ongoing interest and involvement from the public,” the Forest Service said in a statement.

The controversy over reviving the forest is a shame, some say, because, done right, these projects can help restore the identity of forest towns and a feeling few have felt in decades: safety.

***********

About 100 miles northwest of the Tahoe Basin, lower down in the foothills, survivors of the epic 2018 Camp fire that destroyed the town of Paradise have a very different relationship with forest stewards.

The Butte County Fire Safe Council — made up of three dozen foresters, former firefighters and local fire survivors — has countless stories of working with local landowners to heal forests and reduce wildfire risk.

In a ride with four of them in one of the council’s heavy-duty white pick-ups, conversation is constantly interrupted as they point out areas across the county’s rugged wild lands that they’ve worked on.

More than a third of Butte County’s 1 million acres have burned over the past decade. That has made taking action and having tough conversations — including about herbicide — unavoidable.

Connor Gilmartin, the Fire Safe Council’s director of development, sympathized with residents in the Tahoe Basin. “It’d be completely reasonable that people feel slighted if they were to have something happening in their proverbial backyard without knowing about it,” he said. “It’s a non-option for us.”

The Fire Safe Council and forestry herbicide experts stressed that when herbicide is used, crews take significant precautions to protect ecosystems and communities. They post signs along trails and mix in dye so residents can see where the chemical has been used. It can’t be applied near streams and lakes.

Experts also said it is extremely unlikely for people using trails to get accidentally exposed to glyphosate levels that scientists deem unsafe.

************

Now when a fire ignites, it’s often high-intensity, devouring virtually everything in its path — including hundred-foot-tall trees.

After such a fire, shrubs that usually fight for scarce sunlight on the forest floor suddenly have it all day and take over.

It’s for this reason many experts say intervention is necessary if the forests are to grow back within the next several decades.

Without intervening, “the Forest Service is not getting a forest back. That’s pure and simple,” said Scott Stephens, UC Berkeley professor of fire science. Hoping fire stays out of the forest during its slow recovery process, “I would call that risky business,” he said.

To cut back on the shrubs and give the conifers a chance, Stephens said land managers have a few options: Goats, hand crews and herbicides.

Goats are great at munching up unwanted vegetation; however, if they aren’t introduced immediately, the goats are no match.

Land managers can also send in hand crews to take down shrubs with loppers, hoes and chainsaws. But that is labor intensive, and when a fire burns thousands of acres, the time and cost involved can be too high.

That leaves herbicides.

Of those, glyphosate is one of the few reasonably priced, effective and, many argue, comparatively safe herbicides that land managers can rely on for restoration work

****************

In the Tahoe Basin, the Caldor fire restoration plan outlines roughly 3,600 acres where the Forest Service could use ground crews to apply herbicide directly to shrubs — no aerial spraying.

“Even though it’s gotten a bad name because so much attention has been focused on it, it’s actually effective and comparatively benign,” Jon Souder, retired Oregon State University forestry professor, said of glyphosate.

Whether glyphosate causes cancer is still debated.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency determined it is not likely a human carcinogen. The cancer research arm of the World Health Organization says it probably is.

For many residents near Lake Tahoe, it’s not a risk worth taking.

*******

Then there’s a section about Maidu restoration in which it’s mentioned that they use herbicides to get rid of invasive species.

I see that you can argue it either way, California and its wildfires have so many cancer-causing chemicals already..e.g., this story on toxic carcinogens from the LA wildfires, or this on on 82% of Californians live in counties with unhealthy air. With that, you could go one of two ways – “we have enough carcinogens already (the status of glyphosate a a carcinogen is controversial but assuming the worst), I’d rather have shrublands than have one more use, even with restrictions.” Or “since we have so many already, given the amount and the restrictions, it’s no big deal.” Another way to look at it is personal choice. Choosing to eat barbecued meat, knowing it increases your cancer risk, for example is one thing, but having a carcinogen applied when you don’t know where is different. Perhaps there is a middle ground for glyphosate avoiders- to leave the warning signs up permanently.

Finally, there are probably Tahoans who are OK with it and Butte County residents who are concerned. Still Haggerty deserves credit for interviewing and listening to all sides.