Finding a balanced approach for aquatic plant management

Yellow flag iris has made this drainage ditch unusable.

We are now accepting comments on our environmental review of chemicals used to manage aquatic plants and algae covered by two of our general water quality permits. These chemicals are used to manage noxious weeds, nuisance plants, and algae in and around water.

Our draft environmental study reviews eight new chemicals, five alternatives for management, and updates information on other chemicals currently covered under the permits. We're seeking your feedback now through June 6.

Click here to review the environmental study and submit your comments.

Environmental management:
the balancing act

Sometimes, protecting the environment requires us to choose between two imperfect options. Just as you might turn to cold medicine to treat your body when you’re sick, we permit the use of some chemicals to help maintain the health of our waterways.

Noxious weeds are non-native plants that are highly destructive, competitive, or difficult to control. Nuisance plants are native, but they are growing in an area – or density – that causes damage the surrounding environment. These plants choke irrigation ditches, cover our lakes in green slime, and can be a risk to public health. While we work hard to keep chemicals out of Washington waters, we allow them under very specific circumstances to help manage these plants and algae.

Caring for the environment is a delicate balancing act. Our permits require people to use management solutions that have the least environmental impact among reasonably available options. Over the years, we’ve found chemicals sometimes can be the least invasive solution to control the plants and algae that throw off our natural balance.

Evaluating the chemicals covered by our water quality permits

We issue permits that allow the use of chemicals to conditionally treat noxious weeds, native nuisance plants, and algae in and around water. Two of these permits cover the use of chemicals in Washington waters. These are the Aquatic Plant and Algae Management and Aquatic Noxious Weed Control general permits. Our scientific review allows us to determine if we should – or should not – allow specific chemicals under our permits.

For these permits, we’ve evaluated:

Algae under a microscope.

• Algaecides - A chemical compound that kills or reduces the growth of algae or cyanobacteria (known as toxic algae or blue-green algae).
• Herbicides - A chemical compound that kills or inhibits the growth of plants.
• Phosphorus inactivation products - Products used to bind phosphorus in the water column and sediments making it unavailable to aquatic life. Phosphorus is a key ingredient in algae blooms.

These chemicals are only effective at targeted plants and algae. Our permits ensure the chemicals used, and the methods by which they’re applied, are the least impactful to animals and other plants. Permits limit which chemicals are allowed to be used, where they can be used, and who may use them. They also require public notification before a water body is treated, and outline specific rules around the reporting and timing of applying the chemical.

Learn more about invasive plants and the risks they cause to our way of life from the Washington Noxious Weed Control Board.

Why not just remove them by hand?

Non-chemical options are not always the best solution with the least environmental impact. Physical and mechanical methods of removing these plants can be damaging to aquatic habitats. These non-chemical options can have negative effects on water quality, disrupt sediment, and can kill the insects, snails, and fish trapped in the plants. These methods may be so expensive that they’re not really attainable to water managers. In addition, they can lead to a new infestation of noxious weeds by leaving behind plant fragments that then take root in the sediment.

Allowing pesticides to manage Washington waters

The federal Clean Water Act gives Ecology the responsibility to protect state waters. Chemicals used to manage Washington waters must be approved for use by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Washington State Department of Agriculture. As a third layer of protection, we require anyone wanting to use one of these chemicals to get a water quality permit from us.

Water quality permits are a legal tool to allow – and limit – a discharge of pollution into the water. Each permit is different and sets specific methods for release, monitoring, and mitigating any potential environmental damage.

When used carefully under a water quality permit,
chemicals can help maintain the waters we love.
Photo credit: Tristan Hervouet via freeimages

When used carefully under a water quality permit, chemicals can help manage the water we need for the way we live.

For example, water management protects:

• Community use
• Aquatic habitat
• Human and pet health
• Agricultural purposes
• Livestock
• Commerce and navigation
• Boating
• Recreational and commercial fishing
• And much more

The prolific overpopulation of noxious and nuisance plants threaten the waterways Washingtonians know and love. Toxic algae can be dangerous to people, wildlife, and pets. We carefully consider and evaluate all potential solutions for managing Washington waters. The environmental review we’re currently seeking comments on is part of that ongoing evaluation.

Our current environmental review

We recently completed our draft of a new environmental review for our general permits for managing Washington waters. This review, called a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), helps us determine the potential environmental impact of certain chemicals used to treat unwanted plants and algae. Now, we want your feedback on our draft before we finalize the report.

Variable-leaf milfoil in Blue Lake.

We are always seeking more environmentally-friendly ways to manage Washington waters. This environmental study is pivotal to that search. Our goal is to give better tools to those tasked with managing our waterways. We want solutions that target the unwanted plants and algae, and reduce impacts to neighboring plants and animals. We also want solutions that are effective and have a low risk of unwanted plants developing a resistance to the chemical.

Protecting the health of the native ecosystem is our top priority. New information is learned all the time, so it’s important to continually review what we permit with the best science and technology available.

This environmental review is neither a permit nor a decision, but it will inform decisions we make around aquatic plant management in the future.

Send us your comments

We are now accepting comments on our environmental review of the chemicals used in these two permits. We will take input on the Draft SEIS for Aquatic Plant Management until 5 p.m. on June 6, 2017.

Submit comments using our online form.

We will also accept comments by mail:

Nathan Lubliner
Washington State Department of Ecology
PO Box 47696
Olympia, WA 98504-7696

By: Jessie Payne and Tim Lewis, Water Quality program communications

News Release: Ecology, shellfish growers cancel pesticide spraying permit

Ecology, shellfish growers cancel pesticide spraying permit

Application withdrawn for controlling burrowing shrimp in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor

OLYMPIA – Following discussions over the weekend, the Department of Ecology and the Willapa-Grays Harbor Oyster Growers Association (WGHOGA) have agreed to cancel a recently issued permit for use of imidacloprid to control burrowing shrimp.

“One of our agency’s goals is to reduce toxics in our environment,” said Ecology Director Maia Bellon. “We’ve heard loud and clear from people across Washington that this permit didn’t meet their expectations, and we respect the growers’ response.”

The permit came at the request of WGHOGA for an alternative to carbaryl, a pesticide used since the 1960s. The permit placed strict usage rules on a new U.S. EPA approved registration of imidacloprid, a commonly used pesticide, to control the population of burrowing shrimp in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor. The shrimp burrow into shellfish beds, making the ground too soft for oysters, causing them to suffocate.

“We believe we have no choice but to withdraw our permit and address these issues to the satisfaction of our customer base, and the public,” said Don Gillies, president of the WGHOGA, in the letter requesting withdrawal of the permit.

The WGHOGA submitted the letter withdrawing their application for the permit on Sunday, May 3. Ecology staff will now complete the paperwork to cancel the permit on Monday, May 4. 

New oyster permit substantially reduces toxics in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor

UPDATE: On May 3, Ecology and the shellfish growers cancelled the pesticide spraying permit. 
Read the news release here: http://ecologywa.blogspot.com/2015/05/news-release-ecology-shellfish-growers.html

By Chase Gallagher, Southwest Region Communications Manager

We have heard from many people who read the recent Seattle Times column (and other articles) about a permit for imidacloprid use in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor. We want to make sure you have the facts about the permit, the pesticide (and the label you’ve read about), and to set the record straight about our role.

We monitor, analyze and plan ways to clean and protect our state’s waters. This involves limiting and restricting the ways facilities, farms and others discharge any pollution into our waterways.

Two weeks ago we issued a water quality permit to the Willapa – Grays Harbor Oyster Growers Association for the use of imidacloprid – a widely used, common pesticide – on commercial shellfish beds in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor. This is one of many aquatic pesticide permits we issue to ensure water quality is maintained during use of a pesticide to combat invasive species, mosquitoes, algae, or in this case, burrowing shrimp.

About burrowing shrimp

Burrowing shrimp are a native species to Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor. As their name suggests, they burrow into the mud in tidelands, loosening mud, causing it to soften and lose its integrity. For shrimp, that’s a good thing. But for an oyster or clam it means they’ll likely sink into the mud and suffocate. About 25 percent of our nation’s commercial oysters are produced from these two bays. The shrimp are more than a nuisance; they put the shellfish industry and economy at risk.

Shellfish growers have been combating the burrowing shrimp for more than 50 years 

From the 1960s until 2013 a pesticide called carbaryl was used in these same areas.

The Department of Ecology permitted the use of carbaryl in 2002, monitoring its impacts on water quality. In 2008, the shellfish industry began pursuing a less toxic way of controlling the burrowing shrimp population. A wide number of options were considered and tested, including:

• Covering tideflats with gravel and shells
• Organic insecticides such as:
• Mustard seed meal
• Habanero pepper extract
• Garlic oil
• Running all-terrain vehicles over shellfish beds to compact and cave-in burrows
• Propane explosions within the infested mudflats
• Injecting clay slurry into burrows
• Electroshocking the mudflats
• Releasing high-pressure sound waves into the mudflats 
• Alternative shellfish culture systems
• Plastic mesh barriers
• Other chemicals 

The most effective method

It turns out that the most effective way to combat the burrowing shrimp was with imidacloprid, one of the most commonly used agricultural pesticides. It’s the active ingredient in most flea collars for your pets, is used on termites, and protects fruits and vegetables from insects that damage crops. 

It works by causing paralysis in an organism, like burrowing shrimp. It prevents them from being able to move, causing eventual death. It’s most effective against invertebrates, like the burrowing shrimp. It’s far less of a threat to fish or other, larger, vertebrate wildlife, like birds and humans. 

But what about the label saying you can’t use it on water?

Every pesticide is registered for a particular use. The bottle or package of imidacloprid consumers can buy at their local hardware store or garden center has been registered for use on land, not the water. The household label states that. That’s the type of imidacloprid the Seattle Times’ columnist wrote about. 

However, the product permitted for use in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor to control burrowing shrimp in commercial shellfish beds is a different product with a different label.

While the active ingredient (imidacloprid) is the same, these are different products, registered for different uses. This one is explicitly registered by the U.S. EPA and the Washington Department of Agriculture for use on shellfish beds. The Seattle Times column failed to report this important distinction, and we think you should have the facts.

Limited use

For this permit, shellfish growers are limited to using imidacloprid only on commercial shellfish beds on no more than 1,500 acres in Willapa Bay and 500 acres of Grays Harbor. That’s less than 2% of the total area of the bays.

The most likely application will be from the air, during low tides, using helicopters to directly spray right on the shrimp burrows. Our rules prohibit any spraying during high tide, and when winds are stronger than 10 miles per hour to minimize drift. 

Applying the treatment at low tides directly targets the shrimp in their burrows. When the tide comes in, any residual material will be adequately diluted.

Reducing pesticide use by 95% -- less toxic and more effective

The previous pesticide used by shellfish growers, carbaryl, was applied at a rate of 8 pounds per acre. The new permit issued for imidacloprid limits application to 8 ounces, and it can only be applied once per year. 

Additionally, the U.S. EPA says that oysters are safe to harvest just 30 days after a treatment of imidacloprid – instead of having to wait an entire year after a treatment of carbaryl. 

In our testing we’ve found that the most sensitive creatures that live in the mud, known as benthic invertebrates, return to normal levels just two weeks after a treatment. 

Studies and public process

With its widespread use in agriculture, imidacloprid has been studied extensively for use on land. But this is the first time it’s being permitted for use on shellfish beds, and we undertook an extensive scientific review and public involvement process. 

We began studying the effects of imidacloprid on water quality five years ago (in 2010). We started the environmental impact study process in January 2014, and held a public meeting in South Bend in February. Public comments have helped shape what was included in our draft Environmental Impact Study (EIS) released in October 2014. The final EIS was released last month.

Everything throughout the process was posted on our website: 

• Final EIS
• Permit
• Focus Sheet
• Press releases

Monitoring

The permit we issued on April 16 is valid for five years. It includes monitoring requirements, and the WSU Long Beach Extension is supporting some of the sampling required this year. Over the next five years, we’ll review the annual monitoring data, and identify any adverse impacts to the sediment in the bays and water quality.

If for some reason the effects don’t match our scientific findings, we included conditions to reevaluate the permit at any time.  

For some it may seem counter intuitive – the state’s environmental agency allowing the use of a pesticide on shellfish beds. But our job is to protect the water and environment for all of us in Washington. If there’s an opportunity to reduce toxics in the water, we’re going to take it, and that’s what this permit does. 

Mosquito permit attendance welcomed

Whoa! What a great turnout for the public hearing in Moses Lake on the update to the Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit. We count this large attendance as a sign of a successful public process. At the same time, we hope no one was uncomfortable as we tried to accommodate the unexpected number of people.

A big thank you goes out to all the people who cared enough to attend the hearing and for their patience as we tried to make do with the space we had. Ecology will try to make sure this doesn’t happen again by planning for larger venues.

The feedback we received at the hearing was very useful to us and will be considered as we develop the new permit. Comments received are very valuable as this permit is not yet a done deal. The bottom line is that we need to ensure the permit protects the environment while at the same time protecting people.

We expect to have the permit finished and ready to go in June to be ready for this mosquito season. It will allow the use of insecticides to control adult mosquitoes that carry diseases such as West Nile virus.

For more information see our Aquatic Mosquito Control NPDES General Permit website.

---

The truth about the state’s new, proposed mosquito permit

By Sandy Howard

Right now, some Mosquito Control Districts across the state believe Ecology is going to ban them from spraying this season. This is not accurate.

Ecology is working to update the state’s Aquatic Mosquito Control General Permit. The new permit we expect to finalize by June would allow the use of insecticides to control adult mosquitoes that carry diseases such as West Nile virus.

We are currently conducting a full public process on this change and we invite your opinion.

Here is the backdrop:
Federal court decisions and the federal Clean Water Act require Ecology to issue a permit anytime pollutants are discharged into our waters.

Under the current permit, it’s illegal for any incidental discharge of insecticides into water control adult mosquitoes. This will remain illegal until Ecology can issue a new permit that addresses this.

We need to change the current permit to keep us in a legal position to protect human health should a need arise to control mosquitoes infected with West Nile virus.

Ecology’s new, proposed permit will continue to allow the use of pesticides to control nuisance mosquitoes as long as pesticides don’t get into waters of the state.

The permit will continue to allow the use of larvacides to kill mosquito larvae, which is the most effective way to control mosquitoes.

Aquatic pesticide permits provide important public health and environmental benefits. The same insecticides that target adult mosquitoes are also toxic to aquatic animals. They are extremely toxic to fish and other aquatic organisms, including mayflies, caddisflies and other important invertebrates in aquatic food webs. They can harm threatened and endangered salmon.

For more information about the current and proposed permits, visit Ecology’s website. To learn more about West Nile virus, visit the Department of Health’s website.

If you have comments about Ecology’s proposed permit, we invite you to attend a public workshop and hearing we’re holding at 1 p.m. March 9 at the Moses Lake Fire Department, 701 E. Third Ave. Email your comments about the proposed permit to Jon Jennings at jonathan.jennings@ecy.wa.gov or mail them to Jon at Mosquito Control Permit Comments, Department of Ecology, Water Quality Program, P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504. Our deadline to receive comments is 5 p.m. on March 17.

---