ATTACHMENT 2

MEMORANDUM

TO:                  SEE Committee Members

FROM:            Bill Letteri, Public Works Director

SUBJECT:      Integrated Pest Management Practices Update

DATE:                        April 21, 2006

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to provide follow-up information about the Town’s Integrated Pest Management practices in response to questions raised by SEE Committee members at their March 16, 2006 meeting.

DISCUSSION

During the Committee’s discussion about the Town’s Integrated Pest Management practices at their last meeting, three specific questions arose that the Committee requested that the staff follow-up on.  These questions, along with the staff’s response are:

• What specifically will the Landscape Division do to meet the 10% reduction goal for the use of glycophosphate based herbicides (Round-Up) in the upcoming year?

Staff Response:  We believe that in order to accomplish an overall 10% reduction in the use of glycophosphate based herbicides several changes to our previous maintenance practices will be needed.  We are currently working to establish vigorous hybrid Bermuda grass turf under the fences around the Town’s hybrid Bermuda grass playing fields in an effort to reduce the need to apply herbicides to control weeds becoming established in these fence rows.  We have also inspected the Town’s 30 median perennial beds on Fordham and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevards and have identified several of these beds as possible candidates to be replaced with less maintenance intensive seeded turf if weed control issues become a significant problem in the current year.  We anticipate that by adjusting the schedule of weed control efforts in some other locations, such as in sidewalk joints and around signs and guardrails, a modest reduction in the overall quality of service associated with less frequent weed control could result in commensurate herbicide use reductions.

As a secondary approach, we are currently undertaking limited trials of the newly available botanical based pesticide “Matran Pro”.  This product is a clove oil based non-selective herbicide that is exempt from EPA registration.  Although the cost per application is currently about six times more than that of glycophosphates, if our trials indicate it is effective it could be considered for more general use in future years.

• Should the Town consider using flame and/or steam applicators for weed control in certain applications in lieu of herbicides?

Staff Response:  In response to a similar question raised when the Town was developing its Least Toxic Integrated Pest Management Policy in 1999, the Landscape Division purchased and field tested a propane-fueled weeding torch.  The results of this field testing indicated that the torch was moderately effective on young herbaceous weeds but that well established and woody weeds generally re-grew rapidly from the roots after treatment making frequent re-treatment necessary. In essence, the torch functioned much like a weed trimmer without the lasting effectiveness that makes glycophosphate herbicides so useful.  Crews using the torch also had serious concerns about their personal safety and the potential for starting inadvertent fires.

In the late 1990’s the Town of Carrboro purchased a hot water/steam delivery system that they have used to control weeds in certain applications.  At the request of Robert Minick, Chapel Hill’s Landscape Superintendent, Carrboro’s Landscape Division recently provided him with a demonstration of this equipment.  The equipment, which had not been used in the last two years, consists of a tractor with a trailer-mounted boiler that delivers boiling water through a hand held hose.  The results of this demonstration and subsequent discussions with Carrboro’s Landscape crews about the equipment’s recent infrequent use suggest that its effectiveness is limited.  Apparently, similar to weeding torches, the hot water applicators function more like weed trimmers than non-selective herbicides and generally do not kill well established weeds.   The equipment is also cumbersome to use and labor intensive, requiring significantly more time than conventional weed trimmers to accomplish similar work.

• In negotiating new contracts with pest control services, how will the staff evaluate potential contractors to assure that the Town’s Integrated Pest Management practices are followed?

Staff Response:  The Town staff is currently in the process of compiling detailed information about every pesticide applied by the Town’s pest control service contractors in Town facilities, at the hybrid Bermuda grass ball fields and at the Strowd Rose Garden.  In compiling this information we are reviewing all of these pesticides to identify opportunities for substituting less toxic control methods wherever possible.  Specifically we are consulting with our current pest service contractors, as well as with other contractors that may be interested in providing services to the Town to determine when EPA Category 1 (high risk) and 2 (moderate risk) pesticides have been used on Town properties and what options exist for eliminating their use in future contracts.  We are continuing to study alternatives to EPA Category 2 fungicides for control of black spot disease in the Strowd Rose Garden but believe that through this process we will be able reduce the use of pesticides in general and eliminate the use of all other high and moderate risk pesticides in the Town’s pest service contracts.