THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

USFS to apply herbicides on invasive plants in Tahoe


image_pdfimage_print

The U.S. Forest Service Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit will continue a project to eradicate, control, and contain known and future infestations of invasive weeds using chemical treatment.

Work will occur June 24-28.

An environmental assessment released by the Forest Service in 2010 identified 493 known infestations located on National Forest System lands managed by the LTBMU.

Current project areas include 64 Acres Beach parking lot (Tahoe City), Angora burn area, Baldwin Beach meadow, near Big Meadow Trailhead (FS Road 1213), Brockway Summit, Slaughterhouse Meadow, west shore of Fallen Leaf Lake, Heavenly Creek Meadow, Heavenly Mountain Resort, Rabe Meadow, Pope Beach parking lot, Spooner Summit area, Tahoe City area, and the Tallac historic estates.

In addition, weed infestations on Forest Service urban lots will be treated in the vicinity of Ralph Drive, Terry Lane, Ski Run Boulevard, and Mt. Rainier Drive in South Lake Tahoe, Sugar Pine Drive in Incline Village, Marge Court in Zephyr Cove, and Pine Street on Kingsbury Grade.

Target invasive weeds are Tall Whitetop (Lepidium latifolium), Dalmatian Toadflax (Linaria dalmatica), Yellow toadflax (Linaria vulgaris), and Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense).

Treatments will use herbicides similar to the commercial product Roundup. Applicators will apply the product by hand.

Caution signs will be posted in treatment areas and will remain posted for at least 48 hours after treatment. Orange and black caution tape will mark the boundary around each treatment area. A blue marker dye will be used to easily identify locations that have been sprayed. Treatment areas are less than 2 acres across all sites.

Access to treatment sites will be restricted for several hours during and after the application.

For more information, contact Blake Engelhardt at (530) 543.2879.

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (14)
  1. Doug says - Posted: June 17, 2013

    If any plant thrives in a given environment, why is it deemed “invasive”? Do the plants in our basin have a “locals” code, like some of us do? Now if it’s a real nuisance, like poison oak or something similar, fine. But once acres of vegetation are poisoned and the ground left barren, isn’t this just the sort of source for erosion and silt runoff that we normally make a big deal of?

    I thought naturalists were all in favor of evolution, survival of the fittest, and all that. If I have a garden or farm, or some such, that’s one thing. But why is it that we take sides in these plant wars, if it’s nature we’re talking about?

  2. John says - Posted: June 18, 2013

    Doug its not nature when man transports plants or animals to new continents. But the point is that if you had been paying attention in 4th grade you would have learned that there is a food web of plants and animals and when these non-natives come in and dominate an area it transforms an eco-system far faster than evolution can work. You can learn more in any elementary school science book.

  3. dumbfounded says - Posted: June 18, 2013

    John, why the snarky personal attack? The point is valid, barren ground is subject to erosion. And that has nothing to do with Doug’s elementary education.

  4. Doug says - Posted: June 18, 2013

    Yep, when they get snarky from the get go, it’s because they have nothing to contribute. I’m sure there’s a massive industry (Roundup?) and effort that’s been formulated to kill off selected (over 400?) species, and I’m not about to mount any move to stop it. But it seems the left hand seems to contradict the right hand sometimes. I personally don’t subscribe to the notion that man is not a part of nature, and don’t see a big difference in a seed flying in on the bumper of a big rig or the butt of a bumble bee. And slow evolution good, fast evolution bad? Sounds like some folks have too much time on their hands. Anyway, weed on. And thin those forests and let us trim more of our own branches while you’re at it.

  5. John says - Posted: June 18, 2013

    Doug I got snarky because your comment is written on the order of a 3 year olds. Somehow trying to control invasive species means evolution isn’t true?

    Bare ground doesn’t remain bare ground, never does, it just doesn’t include invasive species.

    You are trying to make a point that you are somehow smarter than the people trying to do this work. You’re not.

  6. dumbfounded says - Posted: June 18, 2013

    John, you deride another poster, and continue to do so with baseless personal attacks and even get the wrong person. Do you really think that questioning someone’s intellect makes you more intelligent? Where did Doug say anything that denies evolution? Really, if you have something to contribute to a conversation, by all means do so. But if all you are going to do is troll a comment page to berate others, why not start your own blog?

    Kae, I thought that the baseless personal attack comments were not going to be tolerated.

  7. Doug says - Posted: June 18, 2013

    Thanks DF. I’ll be OK. This is a pretty light topic as far as topics here go. Not sure what axe John is grinding. Maybe he knows who I am and just doesn’t like me. I maintain that there’s just a bit of a humorous irony here. On the one hand it is criminal to allow other species of any form into an area, but only if it is carried intentionally or unwittingly, by man. Or is it by any means? So unnatural. But then on the other hand you have armies of men and women with tanks of roundup on their backs laying waste to hundreds of plant species that have taken a liking to the glens and hillsides. More natural, really?

    Poor little plants. Just trying to make their way in the world, look for a nice place to live, and then they go and get labeled “invasive”. Aren’t they really just “migrant”, or “immigrant” plants, just searching for a land where they can raise their saplings in peace? :)

    As an owner of my own 46 acres, which I maintain as little more than a personal recreational park, I know there is nothing “natural” about maintaining it.

  8. cosa pescado says - Posted: June 18, 2013

    There is an opportunity here to discuss the difference between weeds and invasive plants.

    Perennial pepperweed is not a ‘poor little plant’, its destroys riverbanks for the native species and for the people who want to go fishing.

    Doug, you should do some reading.

    -sr. cosa pescado

  9. WOODY says - Posted: June 19, 2013

    “…herbicides…similar to Roundup” may be the bigger problem.
    Smokey is taking all those precautions because it knows Roundup is a dangerous poison that is proven to seriously afflict, even kill, humans and wildlife.
    That’s why it’s use has wisely been banned in Europe and much of the world.
    The USFS is therefore irresponsible in using it to extensively kill plant life, just because it isn’t native.

  10. Toogee says - Posted: June 19, 2013

    Many people immediately freak out when they hear the terms herbicide or pesticide, so without getting in the middle of this argument, I felt the need to add some perspective. All herbicides and pesticides must be approved by the EPA, and extensive research is done on these products before they get an EPA registration #. One of the main parameters is the LD50, which mean the lethal dose to 50% of the test animals measured in milligrams of the substance per kilogram of body weight. The higher the LD50 number, the lower the toxicity level is. Below are the oral LD50s for Roundup and two common items found in the household.

    Roundup LD50 more than 5,000 (mg/kg)

    Table salt LD50 more than 3,300(mg/kg)

    Aspirin LD50 more than 750(mg/kg)

    In other words aspirin is 6.6 times MORE toxic than Roundup.

  11. LilPeter says - Posted: June 19, 2013

    Ya know you read the incredibly ignorant bloviating of the bigoted teabaggers, climate change deniers, gun nuts and assorted foxified lunatics on this forum and you think you’ve heard all the nonsense possible…. but NO!….. Thanks Toogee.

  12. dumbfounded says - Posted: June 19, 2013

    The herbicides and their effect aside, my problem was with yet another poster who chooses to use invective where it is unwarranted. And, no one has actually answered Doug’s observation that barren ground is more susceptible to erosion. Why can’t we all just get along?

  13. hmmm... says - Posted: June 20, 2013

    I feel compelled to respond to Toogee’s comments on the ‘friendliness’ of Roundup. Thank you for putting things into perspective for us. I had no idea that the EPA was so thorough and so impartial in their testing process. I thought they just did what Monsanto ordered them to do. Thanks LilPeter-‘Bloviating’ is a great word! So is ‘obfuscating.’

  14. Mike Kraft says - Posted: June 21, 2013

    As a West side FLL residence, I need to ask the question about how much “Roundup” will be used and if it will get into the lake.

    Most of us on the West side use lake water in our water systems.