Glyphosate, which is an herbicide used to kill weeds, is being banned immediately in picnic areas in the East Bay Regional Park District, district officials said.
The change was decided Tuesday by the East Bay Regional Park District board of directors, who voted unanimously in favor of Resolution 2019-07-187.
The resolution also calls for the complete elimination of glyphosate from all developed park areas by the end of 2020.
Park district officials said glyphosate is used in the park district’s pest integration management program to prevent fires from starting and maintain vegetation around park property.
In a statement, East Bay Regional Park District president Ayn Wieskamp said, “The Park District has taken large steps over the past two years to reduce glyphosate use and find alternatives.”
District officials said they realize that residents have concerns about the use of glyphosate.
They said that in 2016 the district started focusing on early intervention strategies and using organic products rather than glyphosate when possible.
In the past two years, the district has reduced its use of glyphosate for park maintenance by 66 percent.
In a statement, district general manager Robert Doyle said, “The Park District does not use glyphosate near play areas or water fountains.”
District officials said it will take a lot of money and impact the general fund and staffing levels in order to phase out glyphosate in developed park areas.
District staff members have been asked by the board of directors to tell the board the amount of people and money that will be needed.
The phasing out of glyphosate in the park district comes as litigation mounts against Monsanto, which makes Roundup, a weed killer containing glyphosate that at least one jury has decided causes cancer.
Another jury decided Roundup was a substantial factor in causing the cancer in two married Livermore residents.
Courts have awarded at least two Bay Area residents millions of dollars in their cancer cases against Monsanto.
35 comments
This is fantastic news and a step in the right direction! So now, hopefully stores can phase out and stop selling all products containing glyphosate so no one has access to use any products having this ingredient on there personal properties. Home Depot and other hardware stores still sells it, which is beyond comprehension. Smh
And to the Board of Directors I applaud you.
+1.
Bayer exec: “now who was it that recommended we buy Monsanto?”
This makes sense in a public area, on large plots of land. And, for those who do landscape maintenance for a living where exposure is at a level much greater than the occasional use by a homeowner to control Dandelions, for example..
In my lifetime, cancer has been blamed on everything from uranium to hair color. Now, it’s Roundup.
That damn science!
We all know that judges and juries decide what are facts but it is not a scientific process. If they decide that 2 + 2 = 5 then that is a fact under the law in that case and science be damned.
What is the low cost non labor intensive alternative to glyphosate ?
Any readers have alternatives they find that work ?
Well, one solution: my illegal alien gardner used to hit every weedy spot with the leaf blower until, after years and years of doing so, nothing would grow there because he had blown all the topsoil to Arizona. Bare spots were nothing but hard, dry red clay. Not a weed in sight, bless his heart.
Maybe you’ll think this is funny, the first two times I read your post I saw non union, instead of non labor. Talk about transference. 🧠
I use white vinegar Epsom salts and dawn dishsoap. Works fine for me.
@Gittyup
“my illegal alien gardner” (sic)
Cred=zer0
ON DA and Rich … What ratios or quantities ? Thanks in advance.
Original G I use a gallon of vinegar to about a cup of Epsom salts and a large squirt of dishsoap. The vinegar is what kills the plant. The Epsom salt is for better uptake of the roots, and the dish soap is the binder which will help to stick to the leaves longer. You can find videos on YouTube on the subject. Spray in the shade or before evening so the solution does not dry out right away.
From The Blue Original
1 Gallon Vinegar
2 Cups Epson Salt
1/4 Cup Dawn Dish Soap
A little gas works too.
I tried variations on these. Also there is a product called “Burn Out” which uses clove oil as it’s principle ingredient. It worked pretty well to but I also had some cloves around so I made a tea of them and have been experimenting with spraying.
Unfortunately once you’ve killed the weeds you still have mess to clean up. Foxtail and wild oats were particularly bad this year.
Vinegar and Epson salt
The Vinegar + Epson salt + Dawn dish soap does work by making the weeds on top of the soil look dead, but it does not kill the roots like that ‘other stuff ‘ .
You want to kill the roots or the weeds will show back up in a few days.
Good to know. Hopefully Cities also follow.
Just use distilled white vinegar & salt. (Add a bit of dish soap).
I wonder if they’ll find a connection of glyphosate to autism.
I’m waiting for the lawsuits to mount against the Parks District for creating fire hazards …
Why is this such a big deal? (yes, I get that Glyphosate is bad).
Just do some research and use something else (whatever fits your needs & has minimal negative effects).
This is like Gavin Newsom issuing a press release that his mansion will no longer serve whole milk.
Anyone who believes that Roundup causes cancer is willfully ignorant. Unlike what is claimed about global warming, “the science is settled” in this case through many, many independent tests. The WHO/IARC decision to label glyphosate as cancer-causing was highly criticized, and the test results were shown to have been intentionally manipulated to come to its conclusion (and this is back in 2017).
Science is a harsh reality in the face of modern politics in the courtroom. The judgement was not based on science – it was based on feelings. This public knee-jerk reaction is a sad display of virtue signaling in order to appease the ignorant.
Oh so true. Virtue Signaling has become the new normal, as there are too many willing to go with feelings as opposed to examining facts to reach an informed decision.
Indeed. The type of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma that the guy in Vallejo has (T-cell, AKA mycosis fungoides) has never been linked to glyphosate exposure. Or any other exposure for that matter.
Cutaneous T-cell lymphomas are rare (7-8 cases per million, 10 times lower than B-cell lymphomas), so not much is known about their causes. Known risk factors are male gender, advanced age, African-American descent. Also eczema. Plus general risk factors for any cancer, such as obesity and smoking for >40 years.
Equally non-specific are occupational risks: the highest incidence is in carpenters followed by painters and crop and vegetable farm workers.
All of the dodgy science that the plaintiff’s lawyers used in the trial was for much more common B-cell lymphomas, and therefore entirely irrelevant. But then how many jurors even know the difference between T-cells and B-cells? Let alone have sufficient understanding of immunology, molecular biology and biochemistry to be able to judge scientific evidence (or lack thereof)?
It sucks that the guy pulled the unlucky number of having an aggressive form of a usually mild and non-aggressive disease. But it has nothing to do with glyphosate.
And now with the lawyers riding the wave of hysteria and blanketing the TV channels with ads we can expect even more ridiculous verdicts.
Remember this interview with a Monsanto lobbyist? 😀
https://youtu.be/AbfJ4VwHIqw
Whenever a story like this comes out, I like to follow the money. Monsanto has money, lawyer wants money, lawyer gets a jury to decide Round Up causes or may cause cancer, (not through the Scientific method of course because it’s way easier to get a jury to decide and who wants to get all bogged down in science and facts anyway?) lawyer gets money! Class action lawsuits should be eliminated or greatly reformed because they rarely benefit anyone other than the lawyers.
You’re wrong on some issues and correct on others.
First, none of the glyphosate cases is a class action. These are all personal injury cases with specific plaintiffs.
Second, Monsanto did show the same dodgy corporate behavior that tobacco companies pioneered. Namely, conducting its own studies that didn’t clearly disclose their funding source, creating negative publicity for its critics and spending pretty penny on Washington lobbyists.
Of course, none of this have any relation to the question of whether glyphosate causes cancer. Yet that’s exactly what plaintiffs’ lawyers focused on and that’s what all juries reacted to (according to the interviews and statements from jurors) – perceived corporate conspiracy to conceal the ongoing slaughter of innocent customers.
Third, despite similar corporate behavior, there is a vast difference between tobacco and glyphosate.
Do you know what odds ratio is? It’s a measure of association between exposure and outcome. All other factors equal, the higher the odds ratio, the more likely it is that exposure contributed to the outcome or even caused it. Odds ratio close to 1 means that there is no association between them.
Do you know what’s the odds ratio for smoking-lung cancer association? From 8 to 50 depending on the gender and cancer type. Even former smokers who haven’t had a cigarette in decades have an odds ratio of 4 to 6.
On the other hand, the highest odds ratio for glyphosate-lymphoma association is from 1.1 to 1.4, depending on the type of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Quite a difference with smoking and lung cancer, no?
@Reality Check- you are correct.
If they outlaw this stuff, I’ll go back to spraying “weed oil” (diesel).
Remember how refrigerant used to be accessible and affordable? Another bs cost we pay now. And for what? Global warming is a pile of crap. Think of it. If global warming is real, and the ocean is gonna rise 10 feet above sea level in the next 20 or 30 years, why doesn’t everyone buy the more valuable property inland at 11 feet above sea level? Why do the banks still loan money (30 yr mortgages) on beachfront property if it’s all going to be underwater soon? Nobody with a brain believes this crap. Nobody.
The sea level WILL rise, just not fast enough as you suggest and not fast enough for lenders to get overly concerned.
However, why in the world did voters approve measure AA to pay for something that WILL be under water eventually?
If this was supposed to be ironic, you’ve failed miserably. There is a difference between “junk science” and real scientific evidence. Guess into which category a lot of the stuff presented by personal injury lawyers and their expert witnesses falls.
If, on the other hand, you’re serious, you should try wearing a tin foil hat more. It’s the best protection against everything, from ozone depletion to rising sea levels.
Yea. Scientists don’t understand weather.
You should google atmospheric rivers
If you have any old Olive Oil laying around in a cupboard or someplace, that will kill the weeds too. That way you don’t have to figure what to do with it when throwing out the container it was in.
It’s great that they banned it in the parks. It will make the parents feel better.
However, every year, in the late Spring, the Contra Costa Water District dumps tons of this stuff on the weeds that grow alongside the Contra Costa Canal – i.e. our water supply.
I know this because I run along the trails and see the before and after conditions every year.
So, if it was really that bad for you, your parents would have died before you were born.
originalG, just use a little of the toxic bile you spew. that oughta’ do it.
Comments are closed.