HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01132004 - D2 ''Ill.-.....I..,.....................................................................-................... ................. ............I...,..................I.................
...............................................................
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Contra
FROM: Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee
Costa
DATE- December 1 , 2003 County
SUBJECT. Integrated Pest Management Program Annual Rqport
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
ACCEPT the attached annual report from the Integrated Pest Management Task Force
(Exhibit A).
DIRECT the Integrated Pest Management Task Force to report to the Transportation, Water and
Infrastructure Committee on the status of the program in one year.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
On November 12, 2002 the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors adopted an Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) policy for Contra Costa County. This policy was developed by a Task Force
of County Departments, Special Districts and other interested parties at the direction of the
Board of Supervisors. This action was taken in response to one of the recommendations in a
report published in March, 2001 by the County's Public and Environmental Health Advisory
Board called Pesticides in Contra Costa County.
As directed by the Board of Supervisors, the County's IPM Task Force focused their efforts
during this first year of implementation on the objectives that could be accomplished within the
County's existing administrative structure and financial resources. The attached annual report
describes these efforts, the IPM activities of the four County Departments that manage pest
problems, various IPM educations efforts undertaken by County Departments and the Task
Force's priorities for next year (see Exhibit A).
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
—APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATUREsorJoh(S): a n Glola (Chair) Supervisor Millie Greenberg
ACTION OF BOA R9 ON Jmiary 13, ZU04 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X_ OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT IV AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE
SHOWN.
Contact: Michael Kent (925/313-6587)
cc: Community Development Department(GOD) ATTESTED J&mary 13, 2004
Members, IPM Task Force (via HSD) JOHN SWEETEN,
Members, PEHAB, (via HSD) CLERK OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
>
BY DEPUTY
CADocuments and SetfinQs\ccchsd\Mv Documents0ocs From Old Pc\jpm board order Jan 03.doc
Contra Costa County Pest Management Programs Annual Status Report
Integrated Pest Management Task Force
INTRODUCTION
On November 12, 2002 the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors adopted an Integrated
Pest Management (IPM) policy for Contra Costa County. This policy was developed by
a Task Force of County Departments, Special Districts and other interested parties
appointed by the Board of Supervisors. This action was taken in response to one of the
recommendation's in a report published in March, 2001 by the +County"s Public and
Environmental Health Advisory Board called Pesticides in Contra Costa County.
For the purposes of this policy the County adopted the Integrated Pest Management
definition provided by the University of California Statewide IPM Project:
Integrated Pest Management is an ecosystem-based strategy that focuses on
long-term prevention of pests or their damage through a combination of
techniques such as biological control, habitat manipulation, modification of
cultural practices, and use of resistant varieties. Pesticides are used only after
monitoring indicates that they are needed according to established guidelines,
and treatments are made with the goal of removing only the target organisms.
Pest control materials are selected and applied in a manner that minimizes risks
to human health, to beneficial and non-target organisms, and to the environment.
The goads of this countywide policy are to:
1. Minimize risks to the general public, staff and the environment as a result of
pest control activities conducted by County staff and contractors.
2. Require County departments to create, implement and periodically review
written IPM programs specific to their operational needs and consistent with
the definition contained in this policy.
3. Promote availability, public awareness and public input into written County
pest management programs and records.
4. Help create public awareness and education of IPM techniques.
To achieve these goals the County has established the following objectives:
1. Require County departments to develop and implement IPM programs.
2. Incorporate County IPM policies and practices into County pest control
contracts.
4-1
.................
.........
.. .........
3. Require annual reporting of development and implementation of IPM
programs.
4. Create or designate a County IPM Coordinator to report to the County
Administrator and Board of Supervisors.
5. Create an IPM Advisory Committee to assist Departments in reviewing
pest control alternatives and related costs or impacts.
6. Provide annual IPM training and outreach programs to address the needs
of County Departments and employees.
Entities participating on the Integrated Pest Management Taskforce include:
CCC Dept of Agriculture
CCC Health Services
CCC General Services
CCC Public Works
CCC Clean Water Program
CCC Office of Education
University of California Cooperative Extension
Contra Costa Water District
Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control District -
East Bay Regional Park District
West CCC Wastewater District
Town of Danville Maintenance
Byron Bethany Irrigation District
Golf Course Superintendents Association
Pesticide Applicators Professional Association
California Landscape Contractors Association
East Bay Municipal Utility District
East Contra Costa Irrigation District
California Agricultural Production Consultants Association
Other special interest groups were invited to participate but did not choose to do so.
IPM Task Force 2003 Activity Report
Executive Summary
As directed by the Board of Supervisors, the County's IPM Task Force focused their
efforts during this first year of implementation on the objectives that could be
accomplished within the County's existing administrative structure and financial
resources. The three main activities of the IPM Task Force in this first year were:
4-2
__ _ ............................................................. .....
Development of written County IPM programs — The County's IPM policy
requires that each County Department that uses pesticides develop a written
IPM policy and implement it. In this first year, the four departments that use
pesticides, Agriculture, General Services, Health Services, and Public Works
all comprehensively documented their current pest control programs and
practices. These detailed reports are found in the next section of this report.
One important fact' that was revealed in developing these reports was that
these Departments are already using many IPM techniques and practices in
their current pest control strategies.
• Creation of a now pest control contract for County facilities -- The main
contract for pest control at County facilities expired in the spring of 2003. The
Task Force met several times with representatives from the general Services
Department who were developing the new contract to facilitate the inclusion
of the use of IPM techniques into the contract. The ficial- Request for
Qualifications that went out to bid included a requirement to submit a proposal
for the development of an TPM program. Task Force members reviewed the
proposals that were submitted', and supported the selection of the vendor that
was chosen as being the one that best demonstrated the ability to implement
IPM techniques. The vendor has been implementing selected'IPM techniques
at County facilities since the contract began in July, 2003.
• Development of a pilot program to implement IPM at County'facilities —
The Task Force solicited County facilities to volunteer to participate with Task
Force members in a pilot program. The goal of this pilot was to educate the
County employees at those facilities about IPM and teach :them what their
role would be in successfully implementing an IPM approach in their
workplace. The Task Force initially worked with the Community Services
Department, the Blo-Integral Resource Center and the Child Care Council to
solicit funding from the San Francisco Foundation to develop a model
educational program at four Head Start sites. Unfortunately, this grant wasn't
received. The Task Force then identified 12 County facilities, representing 4
different departments that volunteered to be part of a pilot program. This pilot
program will be conducted in 2004 with existing County resources. This pilot
will be carried out in coordination with the County's new pest control vendor,
so that they can fully implement an IPM program at County Facilities.
OTHER IPM HIGHLIGHTS
As the IPM Task Force set about implementing the County's IPM policy this year, some
County Departments were conducting related activities that also promoted the use of
IPM techniques. These other IPM activities were:
+ The University of California Cooperative Extension (UCCE) office in
Contra Costa annually trains 50 volunteers in basic IPM strategies. A
percentage of the volunteers receive additional advanced training, and in
4-3
............. ...........I...... .......
return provide free workshops throughout the county for homeowners and
residents. These workshops are produced in cooperation with Contra
Costa Central Sanitary District. In 2003 over 500 county residents
attended these workshops.
• The UCCE also annually trains approximately 40 4-H students in basic
IPM strategies.
• The local UCCE Farm Advisor worked With producers of agricultural crops
in Contra Costa County, improving monitoring techniques for established
pests to help growers know if and when a pest needs to be controlled. She
also tested new reduced risk pest .control practices and introduced
successful practices to local growers.
• The UCCE Farm Advisor who specializes in turf management also worked
with the ornamental horticulture industry, including golf courses, schools
and parks to adopt sound IPM practices. Likewise, the UCCE Farm
Advisor who specializes in livestock production and range management
worked with local land managers to help them develop an IPM approach
to control pests.
• The Health Departments Hazardous Materials Green Business Program
cosponsored Sustainable Landscape Management Workshops for
approximately 30 landscapers.
• The County Department of Agriculture gave formal presentations to the
library safety committee on IPM techniques.
• The County Department of Agriculture performed six informal site visits of
county facilities to provide advice on IPM control techniques for specific
structural pest problems.
• A Model School IPM project sponsored by the County Department of
Agriculture and funded by the State Department of Pesticid6 Regulation,
provided educational materials and training on landscape and structural
IPM techniques to Contra Costa School Districts.
• The Contra Costa Clean Water Program worked with all municipal
jurisdictions in the County to facilitate compliance with Stormwater
Discharge Permit Requirements. These requirements include
performance standards that encourage IPM implementation and pesticide
reduction strategies. To this end several municipalities have followed the
lead of the County by adopting IPM Policies.
• Third party scientific analysis by Blankinship and Associates was funded
by the Public Works Department to provide environmental and economic
4-4
......................... - -------------------- .................
analysis of mechanical, chemical and grazing alternatives for weed control
activities performed by the Department.
• The County's IPM Task Force has been working with the Bio-Integral
Resource Center (BIRO)to help facilitate work on their State-funded grant
entitled "Fest Control Operator IPM Partnership". As part of this project,
they will choose a pest control operator {PCC.)) from Contra Costa County
to train and mentor in IPM techniques. The PCO will also receive
assistance in marketing IPM services to citizens and public agencies in
the County. This project is the foundation for an IPM certification program
in structural pest management in California.
PRIORITIES FOR 2004
In 2004, the-IPM Task-Force will continue to implement the County's IPM Policy within
the existing administrative structure and with the financial resources that are available.
The priorities for tate Task Force for 2004 are:
• Further refine the job description and cost for the IPM coordinator position
identified in the IPM' policy.
• Continue to seek grant funding to support the IPM coordinator position.
• Continue to work with the staff at the 12 pilot county work-sites to educate
them about how to implement an IPM control program.
• Coordinate the pest control efforts at the 12 pilot sites with the County's pest
control'vendor to implement an IPM program at those sites.
• Continue to educate and distribute IPM information to County employees and
the public.
• Provide support to County Departments in evaluating and improving IPM
programs.
Departmental. Pest Control Programs
Attached are annual reports for each of the departments that have pest control programs.
These County departments already utilize many IPM techniques in their daily operations.
Their reports help provide a better understanding of program objectives, control options and
how control methods are selected. Documenting these control programs will allow the IPM
Task Force to assist the departments in identifying effective and economical pest
management solutions that have minimal impact on the environment.
4-5
IPM TASK FORCE 2003 ANNUAL. REPORT
Contra Costa County Department of Agriculture
The Department serves the citizens of Contra Costa County through effective and
uniform enforcement of the California Food and Agricultural Code. The provisions of the
California Food and Agricultural Code promote and protect the agricultural industry of
the state and provide protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. There are
three general Department programs that are involved in pest control activities that are
within the scope of the County IPM Policy.
1. Vertebrate Pest Management Program
Objective
The Vertebrate Pest Management Program has two primary functions: (1) To provide
proper general vertebrate pest control options to homeowners and property managers
who are experiencing damage, loss or threat from vertebrate pest activities. (2) To
minimize agricultural and other economic damage caused by ground squirrels by
applying the appropriate control techniques under cooperative agreement with
persons/agencies requesting control measures. Also to advise property owners and
managers on proper around squirrel management techniques to ensure safe, effective
and environmentally friendly management programs.
Description of the Problem- (1) General Vertebrate best Control
Wild animals contribute to our enjoyment of nature and outdoor recreation, but they can
also damage property, agriculture, and natural resources and threaten human health
and safety. Wildlife-caused damage is primarily associated with feeding activity, and to
a lesser extent, related to Benning, nesting or roosting behavior, or the animals involved
may just be in the "wrong place"at the "right time."'
The type of damage and where it occurs is dependent on the species causing the
problem. In examining the damage, one must look for "clues". Obviously, the best clue
is actually observing the species doing the damage, but an individual may not have this
opportunity. Therefore, "signs" such as tracks, tooth marks, droppings, dens, burrows,
and trails must be sought. Together with these "signs," familiarity with the habits of
wildlife will aid in the determination of the species causing the damage. One thing is
certain-as the human population increases, so will the man-wildlife related conflicts.
Control Methods Available
Habitat modification Biological control
Mechanical barriers Repellents
Trapping and relocating Controlled killing
Economic reimbursement No Control
4-6
Animal damage control measures should be applied at a time, point,',and place when
the animal is most vulnerable and with least effect on non-target species. To achieve
maximum effectiveness, they should be applied in combination.Two approaches can be
used to accomplish control:
(1) Education-giving individuals the knowledge to solve their own problems by
identifying the pest and providing information on exclusion, habitat modification,
repellants as well as proper control techniques.
(2) professionals-refer to the list of licensedpest control businesses for hire.
Animal damage control activities should be carried out by professionals when they may
affect sensitive species, require hazardous control methods, or need to be conducted
on public lands. Once the control proJect has begun, it should be applied only to the
extent necessary to accomplish planned objectives. Costs should be related to the
overall worth of the ultimate management objectives and should be equated to social
and aesthetic values.
IPM decision Process
Every conflict dues not necessarily call for corrective action, but it is the sustained
damage, "the total picture," that demands attention. Each damage situation must be
weighed individually on its own merits and in relation to other ecological considerations.
The individual or agency faced with resolving these conflicts must be able to identify the
species causing the problem, and have knowledge ,of the methods or techniques
available that can limit or reduce the conflicts to a tolerable level. The criteria for
determining;,a need is not based solely on economics or impact on other wildlife but may
include human health and safety, aesthetic, social, ecological, political, and
administrative 'considerations. Animal damage control is one of the many tools of
resource management, and like all the others it is a means to accomplish an objective
and never an end.
Depredating Animal Complaints
All depredating animal complaints within an agricultural setting shall be referred to the
federal field technician with U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and plant Health
Inspection Service in writing and faxed to the appropriate number with the exception of
ground squirrel complaints that are handled by the Agricultural Department staff.
Legal Status and Considerations
It is our policy to give advice only for the control of certain wildlife pests. Consult the
Vertebrate Fest Control Handbook and U.C. publications for control options. The local Fish
and Game Department listed can assist with answering questions regarding game species.
Reference to the on/call' information files, as well as, the pest control operators list is
recommended.
Emerging Issues
Public Perception. As development continues at the current rate in Centra Costa
County, homeowners who had never experienced interactions with wildlife will find
themselves having to deal with damage to their property. Often housing developments
4-7
that are adjacent to open space are impacted the most. The demand for services to
provide vertebrate pest control has been increasing over the last 15 years.
Conflicting Goals: Endangered Species Act has created situations where there are
conflicting goals. Special interest groups may object to the use of materials or methods
to control vertebrates. Fish and Game Department requires evaluation and permits for
taking of game species.
Loss of Control Materials and Cost Effective Alternatives: few products are still
registered for vertebrate pest control in open space and rangeland areas.
Encroachment of housing may inhibit the use of certain methods. Many of the products
used long ago are no longer available.
Funding: The department currently is funding a part-time field technician position with
United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. This
field technician provides professional analysis of vertebrate pest damage, helping to verify
the cause and provides consultation to the property manager regarding control and
exclusion options. The future of the continued funding of this position is uncertain. The
services provided by the field technician are at no cost to the grower or property owner.
Description of the Problem-(2)Ground Squirrel Control
Controlling the damage caused by ground squirrels has been an issue impacting
government in Contra Costa County for over 120 years. During that time the County has
tried various approaches with their program ranging from abatement, free rodenticide,
free labor, consultation, or no program at all.
As early as 1874 an abatement law "An Act to Abate the Squirrel Nuisance in Certain
Counties of the State of California"was passed by the State Legislature making the ground
squirrel a public nuisance and subject to eradication in the counties of Alameda and Contra
Costa. The records of the U.S. Public Health Service show that in 1900 Bubonic Plague
was discovered in San Francisco. In 1903 Contra Costa County had 3 cases reported and
by 1927, 15 cases-13 resulting in death. During this period, ground squirrels in Contra
Costa County were confirmed,for the first time, to be carriers of the plague.
In 1909 a general campaign with the goal of eradication was conducted. Free grain bait,
as well as Carbon Bisulfide, was distributed to residents of the county to combat the
squirrel and plague menace. In 1916 the County Board of Supervisors appointed a
Horticultural Commissioner with a main function of controlling ground squirrels. The
present title of Agricultural Commissioner was changed in 1930.
By the 1940's the Agricultural Commissioner's office included 9 squirrel inspectors,
each in charge of a district. This responsibility consisted of enlisting cooperation of each
landowner, supervising the application of the poisons and collecting fees for the
materials sold. In the 1950's, 60's, and 70's the County Board of Supervisors returned
to a more aggressive approach and supported a ground squirrel eradication program.
All services and materials were free of charge. There were 5 €ulltime and 2 part-time
squirrel control employees when the program ended in 1981. The program ultimately
ended due to budget cuts resulting from State Proposition 13.
4-8
In 1990, the County Board of Supervisors approved filling one additional Biologist
position in the Department of Agriculture. This was due to pressure from the agriculture
industry of the growing ground squirrel problem. The position's responsibilities consist of
completing contract work for ground squirrel control based upon agreements
established with persons/agencies, The Biologist also provides expertise and helps
growers coordinate efforts to control'ground squirrels. The current objective is to provide
assistance at cosh where ground squirrel populations are threatening structures or
causing'`economic damage. The Department also provides cultural and management
advice to ensure that ground squirrel management efforts by property owners are
properly conducted to protect non-target species. This is the current program of today.
Crop Loss: Ground squirrels damage many food-bearing and ornamental plants, such
as, nut and fruit trees and vulnerable grains. Ground squirrels will eater gardens and
devour vegetables and undermine structures. They will gnaw on plastic sprinkler heads
and irrigation dines. The loss of forage to squirrels goes beyond the weight of green
matter they consume. The most important competition occurs when squirrels feed on
the tender young sprouts of annuals, whose growth may be retarded or stopped
altogether by close grazing. Squirrels also eliminate vegetation by clearing and
trampling areas around burrows and runways.
Ground squirrels significantly reduce the amount of green forage available to grazing
cattle. In one experiment (Howard, et al, 1959), the reductions in daily weight gain by
cattle due to California squirrel activity were 1.03 and .75 lbs. for the 93 and 62 day
winter growth periods in successive years. Based on the amount of green forage (4 oz)
consume daily by ground squirrels, Grinnel and Dixon (1919) estimated that 20 squirrels
eat as much as one sheep, and 200 squirrels eat as much as one steer. The loss of
forage to ground squirrels can be feltmostby the producer during drought years. This of
course is difficult to predict and plan for. Currently, in Contra Costa County, the average
lease per acre per;year is $18.33 per Farm Services Agency. Ranches>that are heavily
infested with ground squirrels would be forced to have fewer cattle, lease more ground
to support their existing herds or supplemental feed with hay. According to the 2002
crop report for Contra Costa County, the price of hay averaged $105 per ton.
Burrowing Burrowing can be very destructive. Ground squirrels can burrow beneath
buildings, railroad tracks, bridges, canal and levee systems, highways and schoolyards.
The threat of seepage or collapse of levees and ditch-banks requires the elimination or
control of these burrowing rodents where they inhabit such structures. Permanent
exclusion of squirrels is not feasible but can be delayed by devices such as concrete
linings at a cost. However, this is only temporary. The edges of such linings are often
undermined' and any small crevice within the system will be quickly excavated.
Cost for repairs due to ground squirrel burrows is expensive. Contra Costa County
Water District estimated that it cost $36,271 to repair a small section of canal system
liner that was damaged by ground squirrel burrows. The neighboring homes were being
threatened due to the erosion that occurred from the same ground squirrel burrows and
as a result lawsuits were being developed against the Water District.
Cather areas where ground squirrel burrowing is unacceptable include golf courses, railroad
rights-of-way, horse pastures, cemeteries and schoolyards. In 1991` Concord' High School
4-9
.............. .......... ...... ..............
had students who had been injured from stepping into ground squirrel holes on the baseball
field. Not only were the squirrels causing damage to the fields but were also entering
classrooms and being handled by students. The liability of the school district was
tremendous and they hired a professional pest control operator to control the problem.
Disease: Ground Squirrels can harbor diseases harmful to humans, particularly when
squirrel populations are dense. A major concern is bubonic plague transmitted to
humans by fleas carried on the squirrels. Ground squirrels are also associated with the
spread of Rocky Mountain spotted fever, rat bite fever, tularemia, Chagas' disease,
adiospiromycosis and encephalomycarditis. Because of these diseases, individuals are
not to handle sick or dead squirrels unless they are properly protected.
Wildlife depredation: Ground squirrels are known to eat eggs of ground-nesting birds,
such as pheasant and quail. In a study on the nesting of California Valley Quail made
on the San Joaquin Experimental Range in 1937 by the State Department of Fish and
Game, it was concluded that 30 percent of the unsuccessful quail nests resulted from
ground squirrel predation.
Control Methods Available
Fumigation No Control
Trapping Habitat Modification
Behavioral Modification Exclusion
Predators Shooting
Baiting
Fumigation: Fumigants -are toxic gases or vapors, which are lethal to the ground
squirrel when introduced into their burrow system. They provide control through
inhalation. Fumigants shall only be applied to active ground squirrel burrows when soil
moisture is adequate to provide good containment. Fumigants used by the Department
are Smoke Gas cartridges and Phostoxin tablets.
Trapping: Is practical when squirrel numbers are low to moderate and encompass a
small area. Live-cage traps are not recommended because they present the problem of
how to dispose of the live animals. Because ground squirrels carry diseases and are
agricultural pests, the California Fish and Game Code specifies that it is illegal to
release them elsewhere without a written permit. The Department may infrequently use
Conibear No. 110 kill-type traps were bait acceptance is poor.
No Control: There are property owners and agencies who choose the do nothing
approach. The result is a reservoir of ground squirrels that may cause problems to
neighboring properties.
Habitat Modification: Altering the habitat can make an area less favorable for ground
squirrels. Remove junk plies, pruning stacks, rock piles, and old equipment. These act has
harborage. Recent studies indicate that destroying the burrow systems after a control
program detracts squirrel re-invasion of the area. Shallow roto-tilling is ineffective. The
tractor should be equipped with a rippage blade 18 inches in depth. Repeated disking or
plowing of a squirrel-infested area will discourage the animals and they will move to the
4-10
............ ............ .............. ........................
margins of the field along the fencerows, ditches or road right-of-ways. Floodirrigation of
orchard's and field crops will also discourage ground squirrels. These cultural practices are
habitat modifiers that reduce the carrying capacity but do not eliminate the squirrels. Habitat
modification sometimes conflicts with efforts to protect threatened or endangered species
that occasionally take refuge in ground squirrel and gopher holes.
Behavioral Modification: Seed protectants and chemical repellents are means of
behavioral modification which,are effective for some species but are rarely a solution to
ground 'squirrel problems. Sound and visual repellents are ineffective.
Exclusion: Exclusion can be accomplished by squirrel-proofing buildings and by using
tree bands and trunk protectors. Fencing is not considered a practical solution because
ground squirrels are good diggers and excellent climbers. Some innovative electrified
fences have provided partial relief by protecting small plots for a growing season.
Predators: Many natural predators, such as coyotes, foxes, bobcats, badgers, hawks,
eagles, rattlesnakes, and gopher snakes, eat ground squirrels. Predators are beneficial
in reducing ground squirrel numbers and preventing them from invading marginal
habitats. Unwarranted reduction of predators should be avoided. The use of artificial
perches and nests may be used to enhance raptor use of an area.
Shooting: Persistence is required. Shooting may be practical for small populations or can
be used In conjunction with other control methods. Keep in mind that appropriate authorities
should be contacted about the lawfullunlawful discharge of firearms within the county. Die
to liability concerns,the Department does not use shooting as a method of control.
Baiting: Anticoagulant baits are commonly used for ground squirrel control. In many
endangered' species habitats, broadcasting of many pelletized formulations is
prohibited. WARNING: Care must be taken to prevent nontarget poisoning. Do not allow
nontarget species, including dogs and cats, to feed on bait or consume poisoned
rodents. Keep unauthorized persons and children out of treatment areas and storage
sites. Seek medical or veterinary services if you suspect nontarget poisoning.
Biologists/technicians shall be trained prior to use of the control materials mentioned.
Training shall include but not be limited to:
• Reviewing the label of each material
• Endangered Species habitat and guidelines
• Personal Protective Equipment
• Equipment used and calibration
• Ground squirrel natural history
• Precautions to follow each material
• Toxicology of each control material used
IPM Decision Process
Management strategies can be defined as the overall control plan for the pest situation.
Varied management strategies for ground squirrels are possible, depending on the
problem, the situation and the`;desired objectives. It is easier, less expensive and less
time consuming to control a population before there is extensive damage.
4-11
............... ............-............ ..............I.......
Many control methods are effective against ground squirrels only at certain times of the
year. Ground squirrels have a specific life cycle, and 'knowledge of this is important when
initiating control measures. The exact dates of changes in the life cycle will depend on the
region, year, weather conditions, etc. In colder regions, ground squirrels hibernate during
the winter. This is generally not the best time to initiate control. If you use fumigants, the
animals hibernating probably won't inhale a fatal dose (respiration extremely slow/nest may
be plugged behind them). Also, those squirrels remaining above ground feed chiefly on
green forage. Grain or pelletized baits may not be eaten or vitamin K in the green forage
available this time of year acts as an antidote to anticoagulants.
Ground squirrels emerge during late winter, early spring and this is when breeding takes
place. Here is when fumigation will be most effective. There is moisture in the ground
and the young have not emerged. The ground squirrel's normal diet is still chiefly green
herbage, and grain or pelletized baits may remain uneaten. During late spring/early
summer the ground squirrels diet normally switches from green herbage to seeds and
nuts. A bait program is most effective when the diet has shifted to primarily a seed diet
and all ground squirrels are active above ground.
Ground squirrels are active until the hotter summer months, when there is a period of
inactivity known as estivation. The young of the year, as well as ground squirrels along
coastal areas, probably won't estivate. A control program Will not be effective where
some squirrels are estivating, so control efforts should initiate either prior to or after
estivation. Ground squirrels will emerge as the summer-early fall temperatures cool.
Later, adverse environmental conditions will decrease activity during fall and induce
winter hibernation.
Certain habitats require different materials and methods. For example, on rangeland the
objective may be to reduce the squirrel population to 10 to 20% of the carrying capacity
and to keep it at about that level. In this instance, hand baiting with zinc-phosphide oat
groat bait during the month..of June would be an excellent strategy. Some applicators
have experienced poor bait acceptance of zinc phosphide due to the "garlic" odor that
the toxicant has. Pre-baiting would precede baiting by four or five days to maximize
control and insure that the bait will be picked up by the squirrels. Zinc-phosphide is
rarely used as part of our program.
Contrarily, the strategy used by an almond grower is different. The total elimination of
ground squirrels from the orchard and the establishment of some means of preventing
reinvasion from surrounding areas is generally the objective. This could be
accomplished by post hibemation burrow fumigation or trapping with Conibear kill traps
placed over the burrow entrance prior to when the young are born. A follow-up baiting
program could be used to take any remaining squirrels and to intercept any invading
outsiders. This could be accomplished with the placement of anticoagulant bait stations
about the time the young of the year become active above ground. Again the
importance of timing in relation to the squirrel's life-cycle when implementing control,
cannot be overstressed
Threatened and Endangered Species: The presence of a threatened or endangered
species can have a significant impact on ground squirrel control, depending on the
species being protected. In most instances, at least one of the three major control
4-12
options remains a viable method. Where options are limited, special efforts as to the
precise timing of control and the use of the best materials and equipment used by well
trained applicators become even more important in order to maximize control results.
Federal, guidelines and restrictions have been established with the use of baits and
fumigants. Please refer to the 'California Department of Pesticide Regulation web-site
for the restrictions of using control materials in your county or contact the County
Department of Agriculture office.
Legal Status and Considerations: The California Fish and Game Code classify
ground squirrels as-nongame mammals. The owner or tenant may control >nongaine
mammals injuring growing crops or other property in any legal manner.
Emerging Issues
After 120 years of efforts to control and eradicate ground squirrels, the currentresidents
of Contra Costa County have never seen the population densities and damage which
can be attained when the squirrels are allowed to reach natural population levels. The
effects of these squirrels were so impressive that early explorers as far back as Sir
Francis Drake, in 1579, made note of them in their journals.
The County Department of Agriculture is aware that with our current level of control,
ground squirrel populations are growing and are moving back into areas where they had
previously been eradicated. County government will continue to receive demands to
control the problem, just as demands were made over 120 years ago; However, there
are a number of issues that make ground squirrel control more complicated today:
Public Perception. Public acceptance of control programs is harder to obtain since
more of our citizens live in urban rather than rural areas. However, growing
development has generated a new awareness of ground squirrel damage due to new
housing subdivisions within ground squirrel habitat or adjacent open space. There is an
increase of homeowner requests to purchase control materials for ground squirrels in
backyard' settings that are adjacent to open space.
Conflicting Goals: the Endangered Species Act has created situations where there
are conflicting goals. Special interest groups may object to the use of materials that
control ground squirrels and want to maintain large populations of ground squirrels as
part of the food chain. There is a need to manage the program so that economic and
structural'damage can be avoided while environmental considerations are met.
Loss of Control Materials and Cost Effective Alternatives: few products are still
registered for vertebrate pest control in open space and rangeland areas. Many of the
products used long ago are no longer available. Losing vertebrate pest control materials
is a major concern. Materials that are still available are more time consuming to use due
to the nature of the toxicant.
Funding: the department's current directive is to charge for services when doing ground
squirrel control work. Since this service was provided to growers free of charge;in the 00's,
60's and 70's, many growers complain that the County is not providing services in support
of agriculture. Most of the current funding has come from other agencies who are trying to
4-13
...........-............
protect infrastructures. The growing ground squirrel population has forced some growers to
pay for services when the alternative is a major crop loss.
The ability for the agricultural community to fund ground squirrel control can vary from year to
year. Prices of certain agricultural commodities may drop substantially where as forcing
growers to pay for ground squirrel control can damage the ability of agdculture to survive
rather than help preserve it. At the same time, the grower who is spending money each year
to control the pest has a legitimate complaint when nothing is being done next door.
11 Exotic or Invasive Wood Program
Objectives
The Exotic or Invasive Weed Program has three major objectives. (1) To exclude,
detect and prevent the spread of "A" rated weed populations that may invade Contra
Costa County and eradicate these weed populations when they are found. (2) To
manage and prevent the spread of "B" rated weed populations of importance to Contra
Costa County. (3)To help educate property managers on invasive weed issues in order
to prevent new pest problems from expanding in the county and to coordinate efforts
between property managers so that efforts to control invasive weeds are efficient,
effective and protect the environment.
Description of the Problem- (1) Noxious Weed Eradication of
"X' rated Noxious Weeds
As defined by the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) "A" rated
weeds are "Organisms of known economic importance subject to mandato state (or
commissioner when acting as a state agent) enforced action involving: eradication,
quarantine, containment, rejection, or other holding action". In California "A" rated
weeds are generally not known to occur in the state or are known to occur in small
populations of limited distribution. No "A" rated weeds are known to occur in Contra
Costa County at this time but if they are found we must be able to respond quickly.
There 43 "A" rated weeds listed by the State of California.
"A" rated weeds by definition are economically detrimental, extremely invasive and
difficult to control. Negative effects can reduce agricultural productivity and biodiversity,
create safety and health problems and alter aquatic habitats. Although few economic
assessments have been conducted for W rated weeds that are established in
California, millions of dollars are spent in detection and eradication efforts every year.
Many"A" rated noxious weeds have documented negative, effects on:
Rangeland productivity: When certain weeds take over a ranch the value of the land
is reduced. Grazing animals do not eat or thrive on "A7 rated noxious weeds. In
California, livestock and wildlife grazing capacity can be reduced up to 90 percent
depending on the noxious weed species. Because of the taste, texture and toxic
qualities of many weeds, livestock and wildlife avoid grazing in heavily infested areas.
Thus, noxious weeds can greatly increase the cost of managing livestock. Property
4-14
values can fall as the cost of control of noxious weeds, once they become established,
can exceed the value of the land for gazing or other agricultural uses.
Livestock health: When consumed in large quantities marry noxious weeds cause
sickness and even death. A decrease in livestock nutrition can make an animal subject
to disease and result In reduced market value. Some noxious weeds are actually toxic
to livestock, horses are particularly sensitive.
Agricultural Productivity: Some species of `°A" rated noxious weeds can directly
effect and invade grain fields, orchards, vineyards, and cultivated crops. This leads to
increased cost for control or reduced yields if the weeds resist treatment.
Public safety: When they become established, noxious weeds create read hazards such
as the obstruction of vision and the blowing of weeds across freeways. Since these weeds
are not successfully grazed, the biomass created by dense populations can create heavy
fuel load for intense fire-and also choke out less competitive native plants.
Park and open space aesthetic and recreational values: These invaders can also
reduce value and access to recreational areas. Noxious weeds that have already
invaded our open spacehave became a source of nuisance, complaint and under
utilization. Puncture vine reduces usability and it is costly to repair tires. Artichoke
thistle and yellow starthistle`bare stickers that can cause painful injury. Similar
problems would increase if other a rated species of weeds became established.
Soil moisture, natural biological communities and'watershed capacity: Recent studies
indicate that many weed species significantly deplete soil moisture reserves in annual
grasslands and other natural habitats in Caldomia. Species diversity and wildlife including
endangered species is reduced'in infested areas. In addition, noxious weed infestations can
reduce wildlife habitat and forage,displace native plants,and decrease native plants.
This can alter entire plant communities and reduce the watershed'value of land.
Wildlife habitat and biodiversity will face a threat from exotic invasive species. Sites high
in herbaceous foliar cover and sail fertility, and hot spots' of plant diversity (and
blodiversity), are invasibie in many landscapes; Exotic plant invasions:in rare habitats
and distinctive plant communities pose a significant challenge to land' managers and
conservation biologists. Dense infestations not only displace native plants and animals,
but also threaten natural ecosystems and nature reserves by fragmenting sensitive
plant and animal habitat.
Aquatic habitat, blodiversity and biological productivity: Delta marine life can also be
compromised by the large, floating or submerged masses, which greatly decreased the
amount of dissolved'oxygen in the water. This can have devastating biological effects by
creating aphotic zones in the water column. Often when aquatic plants die from cold winter
temperatures they create anoxic conditions in the water column and can carpet the benthos
with a suffocating layer of decomposing vegetation. This can also occur If the weeds are
treated with herbicide after they have attained significant growth.
Water for recreation, agriculture and drinking: Waterways may become unnavigable.
Severe infestations of rapidly grrowing,'floating aquatic plants can create safety hazards for
beaters, clogging navigation channels and marinas with subsequent economic loss. °A"
4-'15
.............. ................ ........ ......I.......-...............
rated aquatic weeds including hydrilla and alligator weed can severely affect agriculture by
impeding the flow of water to farmers' irrigation pumps. If the infestation spreads certain
control methods can affect the drink ability-taste of the water and health concerns may
arise if herbicides are required to manage the weeds.
Aquatic areas would become clogged with weeds making navigation impossible. Boat
owners and marina operators would demand action, perhaps after the problem has
grown to massive proportions. Winter die off of the weeds would create anoxic
conditions in many bodies of water in the county and state severely effecting fish birds
and mammals. Endangered species such as the Sacramento split tail, Winter-run
Chinook salmon and Red legged frog would suffer.
Noxious invasive weeds must not become established on rangelands, open spaces,
parklands, right-of -ways, roadsides and aquatic areas including navigable waterways
and water resources for drinking and recreation.
Control Methods Available
Exclusion and Quarantine Education and Outreach
Detection Surveys Delimitation
Restricted Entry/Movement Hand Grubbing
Mechanical Harvesting Biological Control
Chemical Control
Exclusion and Quarantine efforts are the first line of defense in protecting our
county and state>from Invasive noxious plant species: The State of California and the
Contra Costa County Department of Agriculture have, as part of California seed law, had
quarantines in effect to prevent the spread of noxious weeds for decades. This includes
inspection of seed and plant propagative material entering California from other states or
countries. It is illegal to sell, or spread the seed' of noxious weeds within the state.
Exclusion efforts include the inspection of incoming shipments of plant material and seed at
UPS and Fed Ex distribution centers. Packages are screened and opened by biologists
trained to recognize noxious weeds. Seed samples are sent to the CDFA Analysis and
Identification Laboratory in Sacramento. Other exclusion efforts include federal and state
Weed Free Forage and Mulch Programs and local regulations that require the cleaning of
farm and fire equipment when moved from property to property. These local regulations
have at various times been in place and are not in effect in our county at this time.
Surveys to detect noxious invasive species are a continuous process: State and
county personnel scout and survey thousands of miles of highways and thousands of acres
of range, parkland and open space each year to find and map any new populations of
invasive species that may have become established in the county. We also count on the
eyes of other stakeholders, land stewards, ranchers, public service employees and
university professionals and volunteers. This is more effective if we have a Vigorous
education and outreach program.
Education and Outreach: The education of the public, ranchers and government
agency staff has been a mainstay of noxious weed control for many years. It is an
4-16
essential component of any IPM program, although it is not a solution in itself. When
private landholders and public land stewards take an interest in surveying lands they
control these noxious invaders can be located when populations are small and
eradication is more feasible and less costly. Grower's identification workshops,
PowerPoint presentations to interested groups and stakeholders and 'staff training are
part of this outreach effort.
If and when"A"rated weeds are found,,a series of procedures take place including delimitation,
further education and outreach, and eradication as mandated by state guidelines.
Delimitation: is the process of finding out through survey where and how many
acresilocations of the pest exist. State and or county staff may walk.up creeks, drive
along state highways and county roads, contact land stewards and ranchers, and contact
university and college professionals to gather information on all extant and possible
locations. This assessment of the problem helps coordinate eradication efforts.
Further education and outreach: is part of the delimitation and eradication effort. It
-helps make sure all populations have been discovered, relate the seriousness of the
problem and gain acceptance of eradication efforts. Informationalbrochures with
photographs of the target species, growers meetings and presentations to public groups
and affected landowners are part of this effort. This also increases the number of eyes
that can search for the weed.
Additional Quarantine regulations: may be implemented in an attempt to keep the
noxious weed from spreading in the state. These regulations could restrict movement
into and out of the infested area. This would only be implemented if eradication had to
be delayed or if early eradication attempts were inadequate or failed.
Eradication options for "A" rated weeds that have been detected in an area and are
approved and utilized by the California Department of Food and Agriculture include:
Wand grubbing: has been used in residential areas or in environmentally sensitive
areas such as private residential areas or in areas where drinking water or endangered
species may be affected. Hand grubbing and mechanical control is only effective on a
small percentage of noxious weeds as most of them have deep roots or rhizomes that
are not easy to completely remove.
Mechanical harvesting: for the control of aquatic weeds is conducted under some
circumstances, with the harvested plant material disposed to land. It should be noted
that mechanical harvesting results in a disturbance of the aquatic habitat. Further, it has
an indiscriminate deleterious impact on non-target aquatic animals and can result in a
major physical'disruption to the water body. Mechanical harvesting also exacerbates the
spread of,noxious weeds. Generally mechanical harvesting would be used and has
been used for the eradication of certain aquatic weeds such as hydrilla as part of an
integrated eradication program to eliminate all life cycles of a noxious weed.
Biological control: This method can involve many years of searching and testing is
generally not an option for "A" rated weeds as the goal is rapid eradication. Classical
Biological control is the importation and release of natural enemies or grazers (host
4-17
............ .........
specific insects, arthropods or in some cases fish) that feed on the noxious weed in its
native land. These are usually flies, beetles or moths that feed on the leaves, roots or
seeds of the weed, reducing the overall population. Biological controls also have the
advantage of being non-toxic and are able to reduce the population in types of
situations where other methods would be impossible. They are the toot of choice in
areas such as wilderness areas and huge tracts of marginally productive land where
chemical or mechanical control would be impractical or the cost would be prohibitive. In
some cases plant pathogens, or diseases, usually fungal that attack noxious weeds and
negatively effect its growth and reproductive potential are utilized. One species of fish
has been imported and used for the eradication of hydrilla, an aquatic weed. The fish
eggs are treated to render the offspring sterile.
Chemical control: This is the primary method of choice for the eradication of"A" rated
weeds because of the effectiveness, cost and ease of use. This option provides for a
quick kill to prevent the spread of-the noxious weed. It is much easier and cheaper to
eradicate an "A" rated weed before it becomes established. Recent studies of weeds in
Nevada show that new infestations of noxious weeds often grow at a rate faster than
60% per year and one plant can create an infestation of up to 36,000 acres in as little as
ten years if left uncontrolled. Methods of application include wick applicator, paint
brush, backpack sprayer, handheld sprayer, power tank sprayer or by air. Herbicide
costs range from $10-$50/acre and application costs range from approximately $15-
$901acre for applications made by air or ground spray rigs. "A" rated weeds are by
definition difficult to kill and treatments must be repeated in many cases. The
-population must be monitored post treatment to evaluate the success or need for further
treatments of the same method or by a different method.
IPM Decision Process
All eradication efforts will take place under state mandated guidelines based on past
experience, characteristics of,the species of"K rated weed and environmental conditions.
As defined by CDFA, eradication is the complete elimination of the weed from the target
area. Eradication is applicable mainly to newly-Invading weeds that are confined to a
limited number of small areas that may occur in Contra Costa County. The rating and
action is based on their known extreme invasiveness as obtained through management
and botanical experience gained in other parts of the US or in other countries with
similar climates such as Australia.
In most cases the eradication of"A" rated weeds is mandatory and is under the direction
and control of the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA). Most "A"
rated weed eradication is done by the California Department of Food and Agriculture. In
many if not most cases the state pays for materials and labor to eradicate the plant
pest. Few control options are left open to the commissioner. Treatments may be carried
out by the County Department of Agriculture as directed by CDFA.
Description of the Problem. (2) Manage and Prevent the Spread of"B" — Rated
Weeds Identified as Being of Local Importance
.............--w ..................................-,.....'.
"B" rated weeds are known to be of economic importance and are subject to
eradication, containment, control or other holding action at the discretion of the
individual County Agricultural Commissioner or are subject to state endorsed holding
action and eradication only when found in a nursery. The primary difference be "A" and
"B" rated weeds is that the latter has already established a presence in the state and is
known to occur in limited numbers statewide or is already a problem in isolated
locations. As a result, the County Agricultural Commissioner makes the decision to
control or not to control based on local needs.
In Contra Costa County, the Department of Agriculture follows the same guidelines as
outlined for"A" rated weeds when a "B" rated weedis found that is new or of extremely
limited 'distribution in the County. The Department also has a two management
programs focusing on the "B" rated weeds of special concern to the County; Artichoke
thistle and Purple Starthistle:
Artichoke thistle: is a highly invasive non-native perennial weed species that
displaces herbaceous plants and annual grasses, which decreases the production value
of agricultural land. The stout, upright yet spreading nature of the plant, its formidable
spines, and high densities make wildlife and livestock movement through it difficult.
Mature plants can produce hundreds of seeds, whish will remain viable in the soil for
five years or more, Contra Costa County was identified as one of the most heavily
infested'counties within the state with 100,000 acres of land affected.
Control Methods Available
Exclusion and Quarantine Restricted Entry/Movement -
Hand Grubbing Detection Surveys
Mechanical Harvesting Prescribed Burning
Biological Grazing
Chemical Education
Exclusion and Quarantine: The Agricultural Commissioner does have the authority to
quarantine "S" rated pests that are considered a threat to the county. However, Artichoke
Thistle is wide spread in Contra Costa County and quarantine activity would not be justified.
Restricted Entry/Movement: Movement of Artichoke Thistle and Artichoke Thistle
seed is restricted into Centra Costa County and subject to quarantine action. Cue to the
wide distribution of this weed in the county, movement into the county isnot considered
a major threat for reintroduction of this pest.
Mechanical Harvesting: The typically large size and spiny nature of artichoke thistle
plants make physical removal very challenging. It has a deep perennial taproot,
capable of vigorously regenerating unless the entire root system is destroyed.
Removing the deep tap root system from hard clay soils is nearly an impossible task for
an individual plant, let alone for the tens of thousands of plants that occur in the county.
Generally there is enough energy stored in the taproot that plants chopped off at the
ground will grow back and evert produce seed later in the season.
4-19
........................I—,...........-..... ......
Hand Grubbing: Same as mechanical harvesting. Occasionally cutting flower heads off of
individual plants helps to reduce the seed base when it is too late for other control measures.
Biological: There are no biological control agents being developed for artichoke thistle
due to its close relation to the commercial globe artichoke.
Proscribed Burning: Prescribed burning for artichoke thistle is not an effective control
method. Fire may remove some top growth and possibly kill some seed on the soil
surface. However, artichoke thistle has been observed to be one of the first colonizers
to arrive following wildfire.
Grazing: Conventional grazing by sheep or cattle will not control artichoke thistle and
in fact can promote it, because grazing animals usually avoid this plant and selectively
feed on species that would otherwise compete with it.
Chemical: Glyphosate, dicamba, clopyralid and 2,4-D are all effective herbicides for
controlling artichoke thistle. Glyphosate is non-selective and will kill the forage grasses as well
as the targeted weed species. For this reason,dicamba,clopyralid and 2,4-D are used during
the spring and early summer when annual grasses are still green and actively growing.
IPM Decision Process
Herbicide application is the only effective method of controlling artichoke thistle when
dealing with thousands of acres. Applications are made during spring, when plants are
actively growing and more susceptible to the effects of the herbicide. Where
populations are sparse, individual plants are sprayed using a backpack sprayer,
minimizing the amount of material used and confining the spray to the target plant;
Purple starthistle: is a highly invasive non-native biennial weed species that displaces
annual grasses and decreases the production value of agricultural land. Its formidable
spines and high densities can be an impenetrable- barrier to the movement of wildlife
and livestock in much the same way as artichoke thistle.
The occurrence of purple starthistle infestations in Contra Costa County is not as
widespread as artichoke thistle infestations. However, it has established small
populations in all regions of the county. Being a prolific seed producer, it has the
potential to become as large scale a problem as artichoke thistle. Purple starthistle is
sometimes introduced to new areas through infested animal feed. The early
identification and eradication of isolated populations is key to preventing it from
becoming a major problem in the county and to prevent its establishment in non-
infested agricultural and open space areas.
Control Methods Available
Exclusion and Quarantine Restricted Entry/Movement
Hand Grubbing Detection Surveys
Mechanical Harvesting Prescribed Burning
Biological Grazing
Chemical Education
4-20
....................... ..... .............
Exclusion and Quarantine: The Agricultural Commissioner does have the; authority to
quarantine""B"mated pests that ars considered a threat to the county. However, Purple starthistle
is generally distributed in Contra Costa County and quarantine activity would not be justified.
Restricted Entry/Movement: Movement of Purple starthistle and Purple:starthistle seed is
restricted' into Contra Costa County and subject to quarantine action. Due to the general
distribution of this weed in the county, movement into the county is not considered a major
threat for reintroduction of this pest, with the exception of livestock feed that is infested.
Mechanical Harvesting: Mowing is not-an effective method of control for purple
starthistle. The rosettes are too low to be cut and plants that have already bolted often
respond to mowing by producing multiple rosettes. Mowing plants that have begun to
flower will spread the cut flower heads,which may still be capable of dropping mature seed.
Hand Grubbing: Hand removal of individual plants or small populations, though labor
intensive, is sometimes employed as a viable control method for small, isolated infestations.
Biological: ' There are currently no effective biological control methods for purple
starthistle. Biocontrol organisms have been released in the county, however, they have
not been effective in reducing purple starthistle populations. Biological controls for this
weed continue to be researched.
Grazing,: Like artichoke thistle, conventional grazing by sheep or cattle will not control
purple starthistle and in fact promote it, because grazing animals usually avoid this plant
and selectively feed on species that would otherwise compete with it.
Prescribed Burning: This option can be costly and is generally available only for
public agencies. The need to have the Fire Department on site and air pollution
considerations result in limiting the use of this technique. Burning removes current
growth, but may enhance seed germination. An integrated approach using fire and
herbicides maybe more successful than herbicides alone. Applying the correct herbicide
to newly emerged plants following a burn is an effective approach.
Chemical: Clopyralld, 2,4-D and dicamba provide effective control of purple starthistle
but have little or no effect on grasses.
IPM decision Process
Herbicide application is the most effective method of controlling purple starthistle.
Purple starthistle and Artichoke thistle infestations occur in similar habitats throughout
Contra Costa County. Populations of these agricultural pests often overlap and the
control methods are essentially identical. The pest control practices of these two
noxious weed species are often performed simultaneously as a practical dost saving
measure. Where populations are sparse, spot treatment of individual plants is
performed with a backpack sprayer. This greatly reduces the amount of herbicide used
and minimizes any impact on the environment.
4-21
........................ ....... ....... 111.1........................11 ........I—— _.............I
Description of the Problem- (3) Educate property managers on Invasive wood
Issues and coordinate efforts to prevent new pest problems from expanding.
Noxious invasive weeds whether rated "A", "Bff or are of common occurrence(rated "C")
do not respect legal boundaries. In order to be successful in managing or reducing
invasive noxious weeds it is critical to coordinate efforts of neighboring property
managers. Without this coordination, control and management efforts become
ineffective, costly, and can force increased usage of control materials.
The Department has worked through the Alameda - Contra Costa County Weed
Management Area to coordinate noxious weed management efforts and educate
property managers about noxious weed identification and control options. The Weed
Management Area has also worked to generate grant funding for education and control
efforts based on matching funds provided by the property owner.
The Alameda - Contra Costa County Weed Management Area represents over 20
public agencies and private organizations. As a group, information is compiled on
Integrated Pest Management techniques that may be used to address specific invasive
weed problems that are challenging property managers.
Emerging Issues.
Quarantine and efforts to stop the spread: Many times noxious weeds are
introduced into new areas through infested livestock feed. New federal requirements
mandate in 2004 that forage brought into Federal lands must be certified as "Weed
Free". This program is being extended to state and East Bay Regional Parklands.
Another-source of the spread of noxious weeds is through contaminated road graders
and other equipment used in rights-of—way. The local Alameda-Contra Costa Weed
Management Area is exploring cooperative efforts with operators of such equipment to
reduce the incidence of spread through this source. Recent workshops and a MOU
signed by CDFA, California Agricultural Commissioner's and CalTrans have increased
cooperation in efforts to stop the spread of noxious weeds along highways.
Weed Mapping: Through the efforts of CDFA, California's Weed Management Areas and
several public and private groups and individuals, weed-mapping efforts in the State and in
Contra Costa County are being accelerated. Mapping helps in the analysis of the extent of
weed populations when it comes to control strategies and prioritization. About half of known
locations of noxious weeds in the County have been mapped in the County:Wide GIS system.
Funding: Minor State funding for noxious weed management will end in June of 2004.
This will impact some control programs for yellow starthistle and purple starthistle and
other noxious weeds. Limited federal funding to individual growers for noxious weed
management is available. Federal and state funding legislation bills continue to be
introduced and if passed may provide further funding sources. Burdensome paperwork
is often involved when legislative funding becomes available.
Environmental Concerns: The use of many control options including burns and
herbicide use will be affected by Endangered Species listings. Currently there are
seven species of threatened or endangered plants in Contra Costa County and 47
-22
species of concern. Specific herbicides and control options may not be allowed in the
ranges of some endangered species and specific permitting may be required.
Water Quality Issues. The use of herbicides and certain mechanicalcontrol methods
are limited by the requirements of the rational Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES). Permits are required for the use of most herbicides in water and certain
control methods are considered the addition of a pollutant to water courses. The permit
process can be difficult, time consuming, expensive and very limiting in terms of what
can be used to control aquatic and terrestrial weeds and where these methods can be
used. Recent court decisions make many requirements unclear.
Ill. FEST DETECTION and EXCLUSION PROGRAMS
OBJECTIVE
The Pest Detection and Exclusion programs for the County Department of Agriculture are
designed to prevent the introduction of exotic pests as a first level of defense. As a second
level of defense the programs provide for early detection of incipient exotic pest populations
and swift eradication of the exotic pests that may invade our State and County. There are
two primary levels of action based on whether the pests found are"A" rated or"B" rated as
determined by the California Department of Food and Agriculture.
Description of Problem-A Rated Exotic Pests
Exotic pests in this program include invertebrates such as foreign insects, snails and
crustaceans, exotic vertebrates that are sometimes smuggled into the state or exotic
plant and animal diseases. By definition "EXOTIC PESTS" are these animals, plants,
invertebrates or diseases that may be extremely detrimental to agriculture or the natural
flora and fauna of California. These are given an "An rating by the California Department
of Food and Agriculture and if found are eradicated.
Recent history shows that infestations of Mediterranean Fruit Fly, Mexican Fruit Fly,
Oriental Fruit Fly, Gypsy Moth, Japanese Beetle and several' other insect species have
been found and successfully eradicated in the state. For example, an infestation of
Oriental Fruit Fly was eradicated in Contra Costa County in 2041. California has also
successfully eradicated exotic diseases such as Exotic Newcastle Disease, Hoof and
Mouth Disease, and Bovine Tuberculosis.
History also indicates that if these organisms are not eradicated they eventually
increase agricultural and homeowner use of pesticides, expand federal and foreign
quarantine requirements and add to the financial burdens of both Ithe agricultural
industry as well as homeowners. Apple Maggot Fruit Fly, Olive Fruit Fly, Walnut Husk
Fly, Red Imported Fire Ant and Africanized Honeybee are examples.of unsuccessful
eradication attempts that the agricultural industry and homeowners must now manage
or live with on a continuing basis.
Control Methods Available
4-23
Exclusion Detection
Delimitation Biological Control
Male Annihilation baiting Sterile Release Programs
Chemical Spray Depopulation and Disposal
Fruit Removal Quarantine
Exclusion: is the primary goal for preventing the introduction of exotic pests. Daily
visits to Federal Express and UPS facilities allow us to check incoming plant material for
A and Q (Quarantine)-Rated insects. Any unknown insect is sent to the State laboratory
in Sacramento for identification. Incoming shipments of household goods are inspected
for Gypsy Moth and Japanese Beetle plus other insects and pathogens designated as
A-rated by CDFA. The CDFA Quarantine Manual is the official guide to determining
how to handle incoming material.
Detection: The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) has specific
guidelines for each A-rated pest and contracts with the county to detect their arrival.
Contra Costa employs 16 Pest Detection Specialists who spend seven to eight months
a year trapping for these insects. According to protocol they place, inspect and relocate
the traps in their specific districts. During their tenure they deal extensively with
homeowners and nurseries, educating the public about the program. Over 6,000 traps
are serviced each month. If a target insect is found a delimitation takes place according
to State mandated protocol. Large numbers of pheromone traps are set out in patterns
of up to 81 square miles. This activity indicates how widespread the infestation has
become and helps to determine the proper approach to eradication.
Eradication: If certain numbers of the insects are detected in the delimited area an
eradication process is set in place. There are a number of techniques that may be used:
Fruit removal: to eliminate food sources.
Chemical ground spraying: often takes place at the core mile of the find if larval
stages are detected. The least toxic chemical that will be effective is selected based
on the target pest.Aerial spraying is no longer used in urban areas.
Sterile Release Program: For certain exotic fruit flies a program has been
developed to work in conjunction with fruit removal and ground spraying. In this final
phase of the eradication, fruit flies are treated in the pupal stage by radiation and
then released by the millions to mate with possible wild flies. The result is non
reproduction of the flies. After 3 life cycles have passed with no further finds of wild
target flies, the insect is declared eradicated. This individualized response protocol
is very expensive but results in the protection of the agriculture industry.
Male Annihilation: is a common technique used for fruit fly eradication where
baits and pheromone lures have been developed. In these cases a toxic bait is
dabbed in out of reach locations on trees or telephone poles. The bait is mixed
with a sex lure that attracts only the males of that particular pest.
4-24
Depopulation and disposal of diseased animals: may occur in situations where
the disease is highly contagious. Over 3,000,0€0 fowl were depopulated as a result
of the recent Exotic Newcastle Disease infestation in Southern California.
Biological Controls: if available, may be released in combination with other
eradication activities to increase the chances of success and to reduce the need
for additional chemical treatments.
Quarantines controlling the movement of host material from the!infested area are
put in place to reduce chances of the pest being artificially spread to new locations.
IPM DECISION PROCESS
State mandated eradication of "A" rated pests is based on biological studies. The final
selection of the eradication technique is often digitated by state protocol: The process of
detection and delimitation gapping and fruit stripping and cutting prior to any spray
program is part of each protocol. The addition of sterile release or biocontrol organisms
for Medfly and Mexfly has cut the number of treatments needed. Ground treatments to
deal with the pupating flies are still done on a limited basis. Certain chemicals are used
in trapping Oriental Fruit Ply and Delon Fruit fly. At present new trap designs are being
developed that-would not:require the chemicals. The Gypsy Moth and Japanese Beebe
protocol'depends on delimitation trapping using food and pheromone baits and doors-to-
door queries of the public based on recent history of incoming household inspections
from quarantine areas in the East. When pesticides are used they are chosen
considering the least environmental impact when possible. An example is the use of
Baccilus thuring psis (Bt), a b ocontrol organism for eradication of Gypsy Moth.
Description of Problem-"B" Rated Exotic Pests
"B" Rated exotic pests are already established in the state but are not generally distributed.
They may not be established in a particular region of the state where they still would
represent a major threat to agricultural commodities or native flora and fauna. The efforts to
control or eradicate these pests when introduced into a new region are at the discretion of
the County Agricultural Commissioner,generally based on potential local impacts.
The Glassy winged Sharpshooter(G1111SS)Is a current and major example of a'SH rated pest
whose populations generated a great deal of concern in areas where it was not yet
established. This vector of t'ierce`s Disease represented a huge threat especially to the
grape industry. As a "B" rated pest, the County Agricultural Commissioner was responsible
for developing an action plan. However, since the local action plan for this pest had an impact
on the movement of agricultural commodities around the state, the State Secretary of
Agriculture needed to approve the local plan. In this particular example, so many local plans
were being generated that the California Department of Food and Agriculture worked with the
County Agricultural Commissioners to develop a standardized protocol. Thus, action on "B"
rated pests can range from just tieing a local issue to one requiring state coordination.
Control Methods Available
4-25
.......... ....... ...... ................. ......
Exclusion Detection
Delimitation Biological Control
Male Annihilation baiting Sterile Release Programs
Chemical Spray Depopulation and Disposal
Fruit Removal Quarantine
Detection survey : For GWSS detection involves trapping and servicing traps placed in
host trees on a grid basis in urban areas. Nurseries and vineyards are also trapped.
Trapping and other survey work is performed for other"B"rated pests of concern to Contra
Costa County.
Exclusion: For GWSS all incoming shipments from infested counties in Southern
California are inspected to clear the plant material for sale at nurseries. Similar types of
inspections are done to restrict movement of other"B" rated pests into the county.
Delimitation: For GWSS delimitation is triggered if 2 adults are found. This is due to
the tendency for this pest to travel on nursery stock from the infested area. CDFA
protocol mandates the number of traps placed around the find. For other"B" rated pests
the delimitation survey would vary based on the pest and how it gets distributed.
Biological Control: Dependent on the pest, there may be biological controls that have
been or are being developed. When possible the Department would release biological
controls to reduce the impact of exotic pests that have become established.
Male Annihilation Baiting & Sterile>Release Programs: More than likely if these control
techniques had already-been developed for a specific exotic pest, the pest would not have
become established in the state. However, If subsequent studies develop<an effective control
/ eradication program based on male annihilation baiting or sterile release programs the
County would examine the feasibility of using them to control pests of local concern.
Fruit Removal: This technique could be used along with other control techniques if eradication
of a newly introduced"B"rated pest is considered feasible and desirable for our county.
Quarantine: Quarantine action would be possible based on the Board of Supervisors
passing an ordinance designed to restrict the movement of "B" rated pests into and
within the county. The ordinance would need approval from the State Secretary of
Agriculture if it impacted the movement of agricultural commodities from other counties.
Depopulation and Disposal: It is unlikely this technique would be used for a"B"rated pest.
Chemical Control: Chemical control would need to be based on feasibility of success.
If dealing with a small, localized infestation, the use of a small amount of chemical to
control the pest could ultimately reduce chemical use throughout the county if the pest
were allowed to spread.
Eradication: In the case of GWSS eradication can be expensive but an uncontrolled
infestation would spread the incidence of Pierce's Disease that may result in the death
of thousands of acres of grape vines. The need for public education is paramount
because this insect is most often found only after is has become established in urban
areas. A stingless wasp has been found that parasitizes the egg masses of the GWSS
4-26
............
and it is hoped that eventually the wasp will control the populations without the use of
chemicals. For other "B" rated pests eradication wouldneed to be evaluated' as to
feasibility. In many cases we'might find it more effective to work With interest groups to
manage infestations rather than eradicate them.
The following are examples of"B" rafted pests and how they are currently managed in
Centra Costa County:
The Apple-Maggot Fly: was originally an A Rated insect but when the eradication
faded it;became a county problem for the shippers of apples. There'is a Compliance
Agreement format that the individual growers sign and pay for the trapping by county
detection specialists. Orchards found free from the fly gives growers the documentation
that allows them to ship out of state and out of the country. Quarantines imposed from
other jurisdictions are examples of the consequences of the failure of detection and
eradication of a target insect.
Olive Fruit lily: is an example of an A-Rated insect that control and eradication efforts
failed. In five years it has spread over most of the state and has devastated the olive
industry. Now commercial growers must treat to control the insect and the home olive
and olive oil business is not viable. A biocontrol insect has recently been released to
help control the fly. Currently, Contra Costa olive growers who wish to send their
product for pressing must spend the money to trap and treat their trees.'
There are other potentially harmful "B"rated invertebrates threatening to spread north to
Centra Costa. There are quarantines in place to exclude the Africanized Honey Bee
(AHB) and Red Imported Fire Ant (RIFA) affect the nursery and apiary industries.
Biologists trap and check the nurseries for RIFA at least once a year. Contra'Costa had
a single incidence, of AHB in 1997. Detection trapping over a five-year period
determined that this bee has not become established in the county.
EMERGING ISSUES
The emerging problems.associated with failed eradications and B-Rated insects injurious to
a specific industry are more difficult to cover. Glassy-winged Sharpshooter infestations in
other areas of the State are numerous and controlling this insect relies on inspection and
treatment with chemicals at origin and If found, at destination. The development of
biological controls takes time and money. Public education and awareness is';part of the
early warning as well as heavy trapping in urban and nursery settings. Failed eradications
lead to more quarantine restrictions on growers and more use of chemicals by both
growers and homeowners. New exotic pests of concern (e.g. Vine Mealybug this year)
seem to arise yearly. Each must be evaluated as to environmental and economic impact in
the decision of whether to eradicate. New methods are slow to develop and trap designs
must be tested at length before they are released for use. The use of li'M methods has
grown in the last decade but lin the case of Exclusion and Pest Detection these are
controlled and mandated by state protocol not county policy.
4-27
.......... ............ ........ ...... .............................. ..............-.....-............
IPM TASK FORCE REPORT 2003
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GENERAL SERVICES- GROUNDS
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PEST CONTROL PROGRAM
OBJECTIVES
The objective of our Landscape Maintenance Pest Control Program is to reduce
problem pest populations to an acceptable level and the amount of high maintenance
associated with these plant pests, to create a safe environment associated with the
landscape, and to have and maintain an aesthetically pleasing landscape.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM
The General Services-Grounds Division is responsible for the landscape maintenance
of 107 County Buildings and 50 Public Works Landscape and Lighting District Service
Areas. Our Integrated Pest Management Program addresses the need for control or
elimination of unwanted vegetation in our landscape (general weeds), diseases and
insects pests on landscape plants, and vertebrate pests in the landscape (gophers).
Weeds: Many species of invasive plants can thrive in the landscape. These weeds
compete for water and nutrients meant for desirable plants. Perhaps the major reason
for landscaping around public buildings is to create an aesthetically pleasing
environment. Weeds> are major detractors to landscape aesthetics. They make a
landscape look messy and unkempt. Dry and dead weeds create a fire hazard. In
addition weeds can serve as reservoirs for plant diseases and insect pests.
Insects: Insect populations, if not treated and kept under control, can destroy or severely
damage landscape plant material. This creates aesthetic problems and can require
replacement. Landscape plants are expensive. Trees, turf and shrubs are susceptible to
damage and death. Aphids, scales and other homopterous insects often create a sticky
liquid material known as "honeydew". This material can create safety, liability and health
hazards when it falls from trees or shrubs onto the sidewalk or on people.
Landscape Plant Diseases: Phytophthora ssp, Oak Root Fungus, Pine Pitch Canker
and Anthracnose are common diseases of landscape trees and shrubs. When possible,
plants affected by these pathogens should be treated to help stop the spread of the
disease into other plantings maintained by the county and into the neighborhood.
Treatment can save a tree and prevent costly tree removal. Diseased trees are more
susceptible to wind fall and subsequent liability claims. Dead diseased trees also create
a fire hazard and require removal.
Gophers: Unsightly mounds of dirt in turf and dead plants girdled or gnawed at the
roots are signs of gophers. Gophers are a constant problem when maintaining the
landscape. In addition to the aesthetic problem, the mounds, holes and burrows in
existing turf and landscape created by gophers are a safety hazard.
4-28
.... ..... . ..........
IPM TASK FORCE REPORT 2003
If we did not perform landscape maintenance, there would be numerous safety issues,
such as diseased plants and trees, overgrown shrubs and trees, gopher holes in the turf
and landscape, and weeds that would dry and become a fire hazard. The cast of
maintenance would increase, potential ,lawsuits would Increase and the landscape
would look terrible, with many complaints.
CONTROL METHODS AVAILABLE
The following control methods are used in various landscapes in California. Our Grounds
Division is currently using selected safe,cost effective options;
Preventive planting choices: In landscape design we try to use disease resistant
varieties of plant material, native plants, and the right shrub or tree for the right location.
This reduces maintenance problems.
Manual removal: Nand weeding, using shovels, hoes, hand weeders are used for
weed management in some landscape situations.
Mechanical. Disking and flail mowers are used on large field areas or vacant lots.
Weed eaters are used to knock down weeds in smaller right of ways.
Cultural: Mulching landscapes using donated wood chips conserves moisture,
prevents weed germination and growth, and less pre-emergent herbicides may be used. -
These wood chips and ground leaves and other-organic matter make an attractive
mulch that make manual weed control easier.
Biological: Some insect pests maybe managed by the use of biological controls.
These classical blocontrol agents maybe available through the County Agriculture
Department, for example wasps were released to control the ash whitefly and the red
gum lerp psyllid. In some cases biocontrol agents such as lady bird beetles, predatory
mites and green lacewings are used but athey are not always effective in unpredictable
outdoor situations. These types oof augmentive biological controls tend to be very
expensive and should only be used in the most sensitive situations.
Heat and Burning. Propane torches generate heat up to 2,000' F. Used properly, they
are safe and easy to operate as a tool to reduce or eliminate herbicide use where
children and pets could be exposed. Weed Dragon@ is certified for use in the U.S. Hot
foam generators like the Waipuna system uses a non-toxic, biodegradable Organic Hot
Foam method and is applied to unwanted weeds, killing them instantly. This method is
thought to be more effective than the propane torch but requires a long-term equipment
lease that ranges into the tens of thousands of dollars.
Grazing: This method is generally not an available tool in the landscape. It may be
appropriate in vacant lots and 'right of ways depending on location and situation. Goats
are more manageable than other types of animals used for weed control.
4-29
IPM TASK FORCE REPORT 2003
Chemical: Non-restricted, category 111 pesticides are currently used for control of many
pest species:
Weeds: pre-emergent chemicals are used to prevent weed seeds from
germinating-the herbicides used are Gallery and Ronstar.
Post-emergents are eliminated by the use of Roundup herbicide.
Broadleaf weed control-Turllon
Insects and diseases-to control aphidslscales/mite/thrips- Malathion,
Orthene and volck oil are used. This protects tree health and reduces sticky
honeydew that falls on pavement, sidewalks and vehicles.
Fruit elimination on trees- Florel €s used. This eliminates the need to clean up
messy olives and plums from ornamental trees
Gophers- are controlled by using gopher traps and Eaton's gopher bait.
We also contract with Pest Control Companies for gopher control.
IPM THOUGHT PROCESS
The General Services Department-Grounds uses a combination of control methods
based on safety, efficiency, cost effectiveness, aesthetics and budget. Our IPM process
is based on monitoring, previous experience and results. Our Department is concerned
with getting the most control and results, while putting safety and the environment first.
4-30
IPM Task Force Annual Report 2003
Contra Costa Regional Medical Center Hospital and Clinics
L disinfections of Hospital Surfaces
Objectives
In the hospital, surfaces such as counter tops, floors, patient bed headboards, etc.,
must be cleaned periodically at different cleanliness levels depending on the area. The
aim is to kill most bacteria and some viruses and fungi, but not necessarily tuberculosis
causing microorganisms and spores. The goal is to protect employees and;patients.
Sterilization is a process designed to provide 100% kill of all microbial life, and is
reserved for critical items such as surgical instruments, implants, etc., only.
The most common types of disinfectants used in hospitals are Quaternary Ammonium
Chlorides, Phenols, Alcohols, Bleaches, Iodine-based and Hydrogen 'Peroxide-based.
Some of these are classified as pesticides. The two pesticide disinfectants used at
CCRMC` are PH7Q (a quaternary)used for patient-care areas and Sodium Hypochlorite
(Bleach) used for drains.
Description of Problem
Bacteria, viruses and other pathogens are always present at hospitals. Many times
harsh "Hospital Grade" chemicals must be used to combat these ;germs. These
products may have detrimental health impacts on janitorial staff, other hospital
employees and patients. Additionally many of these products pose environmental and
regulatory problems. However, the drawback of not using them, in most instances, is of
much greater risk.
In a hospital there are different levels of cleaning necessary for different surfaces.
Critical items such as surgical supplies necessitate sterilization, patient care areas
require cleaning followed by disinfection and non patient-care areas require only
cleaning/sanitizing.
Control Methods Available
Since it is neither necessary nor possible to sterilize all areas in a hospital.;It is important to
keep in mind what is being cleaned and therefore what level of cleanliness is necessary
when choosing a product. The control methods to be considered should include:
Should I do nothing (not common in a healthcare setting)?
Should I clean thoroughly with a sanitizer? (restricted staff areas, toilets)
Should I disinfect? (patient-care areas)
Should I sterilize? (instruments)
At that point the different methods of cleaning is important to consider. However, it is
important to realize that in healthcare there are things to consider when deciding upon a
4-3'1
....................
.........................
........................
cleaning method. Material type, shape of the item to be cleaned, where the item will be
used, and manufacturer warranty requirements are but a few considerations.
IPM Decision Process
IPM takes into account all of the relevant factors to each individual situation. The necessity
of protecting our patient and employee population is primary at CCRMC. For this reason,
in some situations, no changes can be made. However, realizing that minimizing pesticide
application reduces both patient and employee exposure to toxic chemicals, we will employ
IPM. We will employ the following thought process regarding cleaning:
• Be clear with employees regarding which areas necessitate what level of cleaning.
Reinforce that staff areas do not need to be disinfected, vs. simply cleaned with a
detergent/sanitizer.
0 Select the right product.
* Evaluate the frequency of cleaning that different areas require. Do not re-sterilize an
area that was previously sterilized unless that area has had patients access it.
0 Follow product-mixing instructions and only make up what is needed for each job.
Don't use concentrated product.
• Clean properly. In order to kill, disinfectants must come into contact With germs and for a
specific amount of time, that means the surface must first be cleaned of dirt, food, etc.
Working in sequence will provide an adequate kill and avoid the need for a second cleaning.
For example: clean, disinfect, wait--do something else like fill paper dispensers,then wipe
off disinfectant.
Emerging Issues
IPM and Pollution Prevention are to the environment what prevention of disease is to
Healthcare. In this spirit, we plan to move forward with IPM regarding new technologies
related to disinfections in hospitals. However, since our first job is healthcare, we will
always adhere to infection control and CDC guidelines.
We will ask vendors if they carry less-toxic products that have equal efficacy. We will
bring these options to our New Products Committee. During the decision making
process, we will consider environmental and human risks, not simply purchase price.
✓ We will investigate the use of the Microfiber mop that requires fewer chemicals and
is ergonomically superior to conventional wet mops.
When existing cleaning products contracts expire, we will consult with one of the
following for ideas on emerging technologies:
■ County Hazardous Materials Program Pollution Prevention Program (646-2286)
■ Hospitals for a Healthy Environment (h2e-online.org)
■ Sustainable Hospitals tals.org)
4-32
----------
....................
IPM Task Force Annual Report 2003
Contra'Costa Regional Medical Center Hospital and Clinics
11. Equipment Sterilization
Objectives
In the hospital many medical devices that enter human tissue or the vascular system
must be thoroughly sterilized to prevent infection. Sterilization is defined by the Center
for Disease Control (CDC) as the complete elimination or destruction of all forms of
microbial life. CCRMC uses a number of different methods of sterilization.
• Steam Sterilization - about 95%of our items are cleaned this way(mostly metat)
■ Sterrad - about 3% of our sterilization is completed using this peracetic acid solution
that breaks down in the sewer-mostly lenses and f+beroptic scopes.
• Sterris — about 2% of our equipment is cleaned in this hydrogen peroxide based
sterilant.This includes items that cannot be completely sterilized by Sterrad
■ Sporox—only flexible endoscopes are cleaned in this per acetic acid/phosphoric acid solution.
Description of Problem
Many medical and surgical apparatus such as cardiac catheters,implants,surgical instruments,
etc., must be 100 dean, no exceptions. Harsh environments are needed;to accomplish this.
Anything less than a complete Will of pathogens could have life threatening effects.
Control Methods Available
The most common types of sterilization methods are low temperature sterilization (such
as Ethylene Oxide/EtO), liquid chemicals (such as glutaraldehyde), dry heat or steam
under pressure. While each of these sterilization control methods exists to sterilize
medical equipment, each piece of equipment has individual requirements. Therefore,
each method is not an option for each type of equipment. At CCRMC we employ both
steam sterilization and liquid chemicals.
IPM Decision Process
The necessity to protect our patient and employee population is primary at CCRMC. It is
a legal/regulatory obligation as well. For this reason reducing chemical' use in this
situation is therefore not possible. However, the following changes in sterilant types
have been made and these changes do adhere to IPM principles.
■ In former years, Ethylene Oxide was used. EtO is dangerous to employees and
causes environmental concerns. Our new sterilization methods listed above
pose much less risk to employees and have fewer environmental concerns.
■ In the past few years, CCRMC switched from a glutaraldehye-based sterilant for
endoscopes to a product called Sporox that is much less hazardous to employee
4-33
health. This switch has also resulted in a reduction in hazardous waste generated
as Sporox can be treated and disposed ;of to the sanitary system whereas
glutaraldehye required disposal by hazardous waste firm.
Emerging Issues
Currently we know of no emerging issues in less toxic sterilants that have the same efficacy
required by the CDC. However, we will keep apprised of emerging issues by speaking to
vendors and consulting with CCC Hazardous Materials Pollution Prevention Program.
4-34
IPM TASK FORCE 2003 ANNUAL REPORT
Contra Costa County Public Works Department
Vegetation Management Program
1. Roadside Right-of-Way
Objectives
The Public Works Department controls the vegetation along county roads in order to(1)reduce
the danger of fres, (2') maintain sight clearance, (3)control noxious and invasive weeds, and
(4)protect open;space and:endangered species, and (5)provide for an aesthetically pleasing
facility. In the end, all of these reasons have(6)an economic component.
Description of Problem
Fire Hazard: Annual weeds growing along roadside rights-ref-way in Contra Costa
County are-highly flammable in our hot stammers. Vehicles that pull off to the side of our
rural roads can cause fires due to contact between this vegetation and the catalytic
converter under their vehicle (avery hot surface). Cigarettes thrown from vehicles can
also start fires along these areas. Glass and metal objects in these areas can also ignite
this vegetation. Many of our roads are adjacent to open space and parks that are at
substantial risk from fire.
Sight Clearance: Annual weeds and perennial trees and shrubs can limit the sight
distance along roads. This has two effects. Drivers traveling on reads with limited sight
visibility-tend to move closer to the centerline, increasing the risk of head-on collisions
with other vehicles. The second effect is to limit the ability to see, "down the road." This
places pedestrians and bicyclists at added risk. It can also prevent a driver from seeing
other hazards in a timely fashion. Some weeds, such as puncture vine, can cause
immediate `blow-outs"of bicycle tires, which can in turn result in substantial injury.
Noxious/invasive Weed Control: Public rights-of-way, including roads, have been
identified' as a route for the spread of noxious and invasive weeds. Our personnel
inspect our facilities for these species in order to control the spread of these weeds into
adjacent properties.
Open Space/Endangered Species Protection: Controlling and/or eradicating invasive
and noxious weeds helps to protect open space and endangered species from the
competition of alien species.
Aesthetics: The citizens -of the county have an expectation that our roads will be
maintained to a level which is aesthetically pleasing, or at least isn't unsightly. Roads
that appear to be messy result in complaints. Weedy areas tend to attract the dumping
of debris, and unmanaged vegetation becomes a collector of wind-blown' litter.
Economic Impact: The hazards described above can result in litigation,.and indeed we
are currently in litigation for claims resulting from some of these hazards. Some
4-35
.................. ............. ................. ....... ................... ............ ......
IPM TASK FORCE 2003 ANNUAL REPORT
vegetation growing along the edge of pavement can reduce pavement life by slowly
breaking and growing through the pavement surface. Litigation and reduced pavement
life have an adverse impact on our department's ability to serve the public.
Control Methods Considered
Doing Nothing: This is an option is only a few areas. Fire regulations require that we
abate weeds on our property, or the fire district will have it done at our expense.
Exclusion: While exclusion is a component of IPM, our department has no legal
authority to restrict the importation of weeds or weed seed into the county. We do use
Certified Seed to insure that we are not introducing weeds into our facilities. We monitor
our facilities for the presence of newly introduced weeds. We also clean our equipment
to prevent the spread of weeds from one site to another,
Outreach/Education: Our department has developed literature on pesticide
alternatives and disposal in compliance with our Water Quality Control Board permit.
Department staff also answers inquiries from the public,
Mechanical: This method includes discing/tilling, mowing, weedeating and hand
removal, and chainsaw/polesaw use.
* Discing and tilling are not appropriate weed control methods along our roads due
to the damage they cause to road surfaces and shoulders. These methods may
also be illegal where endangered species are present.
* Mowing with a tractor-mounted mower has been used on a limited basis for weed
abatement due to its high cost. This method has also been used to tdm trees and
shrubs along roads. This method is more cost-efficitent than using chainsaws and
polesaws, but has resulted in negative publicity (Carquinez Scenic Drive) due to
aesthetic concerns. However, the use of this equipment reduced employee exposure
to poison oak and the workers compensation claim' s that result from this activity. The
cost to mow all of our roadside rights-of-way would require an increase in this budget
item from the current$320,000 to an estimated$2.7-3 million per year.
• Weedeaters and hand tools are used to abate weeds in some areas when other
weed control methods are inappropriate.This is an expensive method with a high
rate of workers compensation claims.
• Chain saws and pole gunners are used to trim trees and shrubs growing along
roadside rights-of-way. The 'majority of this work is performed by the Inmate
Crew from Marsh Creek Detention Facility. This-vegetation is cut back to conform
with County Standard Plans.
Cultural: This method is related to habitat modification. Mitigation plantings have been
made in an attempt to reduce weed growth through competition. Existing trees and
shrubs along our roads are trimmed to maximize this effect.
Grazing: Grazing has been used on a few flood control properties, but this method is
not suitable to use on roadside rights-of-way. The risk of vehicles striking these animals
is too great to give it further consideration at this time.
4-36
IPM TASK FORCE 2003 ANNUAL REPORT
Controlled Burn. We have not given serious consideration to burning.weeds along our
roadsides due to the high risk such an operation would entail in our county. Air quality
concerns make this method even more difficult to use. Most .agencies that use this
method have their own fire department.
Habitat Modification: Habitat modification is taking place as the rural portions of our county
give way to development. When sidewalks andfor landscape are installed alone roads,we do
not need to control weeds in those areas. We are monitoring ongoing research being
conducted by Cal Tans and other agencies with regard to habitat modification.
Mulch: Our department has used mulch at selected sites since 1986. When poison oak i
not present, we chip the trees and shrubs we trim and use this mulch to reduce weed
growth. Examples include a portion of Reliez Malley Road. The use of mulch can constitute
a potential fire hazard, as was experienced by a church in Pleasant Hill this year.
Biological. Biological weed control is not a stand-alone method of eliminating weeds.
This method can control a few species, usually in conjunction with the 11 use of methods.
Puncture gine and Yellow Starthistle are two of the species targeted by this method.
Herbicides. Most of our weed control along county roads consists of spraying herbicides.
Prior to the application of these:materials, the site is inspected and a written recommendation
is madeby a 'licensed Pest Control Advisor on staff. Treatment need;timing, and type are
detem Tined by this inspection process, as well as by looking at the history of the site. All
materials we use are approved For use by the E.P.A. and'state regulators.
IPM decision Process'
Our department uses the enclosed Weed Control Decision Chart to determine the need,
choose a method, and then evaluate the effectiveness of a weed control activity. The
foundation of any pest control program -is site inspection. The entire Vegetation
Management staff is responsible for ongoing site inspection, and for reporting their findings.
In order to insure that this inspection and evaluation process is accurate, all employees
in the Vegetation Management Program are licensed by the California Department of
Pesticide Regulation and receive continuing education in this field each year.
Each site is evaluated for hazards and limitations. Posted (and actual):speed,adjacent
vegetation or habitat, proximity to buildings (frames, schools, businesses, etc...), and
prevailing weather conditions are considered'. Included in these limitations' are the
money,'labor, and equipment available to control these weeds,
Considering the above hazards and limitations, our primary method of weed control is done
through the use of herbicides. We make our applications when the population of weeds is
high enough to warrant control.'We use our limited supply of mulch to reduce weed growth
where it will be most efficient. Our use of mechanical weed abatement is lirnited by our
budget, and by the availability of labor when this activity is safe and effective. Specific
herbicides are chosen for their effectiveness in controlling target weeds.
4-37
IPM TASK FORCE 2003 ANNUAL. REPORT
Emerging issues
While it is impossible to forecast change, it inevitable. For this reason, our personnel
actively participate in research in the vegetation 'management field. In addition, we
fallow the research of other agencies and the University of California.
If. Flood Control
Objectives
The Public Works Department controls the vegetation in our flood control facilities in
order to (1) reduce the danger of fires, ( ) reduce the risk of flooding in these facilities,
(3) reduce the risk of damage to these facilities, (4) eliminate or control invasive
species, (5) protect open space and endangered species, and (6) protect the economic
interests of the county.
Description of Problem
Fire: Annual weeds growing in our flood control facilities are highly flammable in our hot
summers. Fires are caused by fireworks, intentional arson, homeless encampments,
and even by spontaneous combustion in these areas. Their proximity to homes,
businesses, and open space make it imperative that we abate this fire hazard. Our goal
is to have all areas abated prior to the fourth of July in order to reduce this risk.
Flooding: Vegetation in these facilities must also be maintained according to the
Operation and Maintenance guidelines 'set forth by the Army Corps of Engineers,
Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service), or
another engineering service. Vegetation growing in these facilities can slow or obstruct
the flow of water, resulting in localized or widespread flooding. Trees, shrubs, and
marginal weeds mustbe controlled within these guidelines. Failure to do so pats the
Flood Control District and the County at risk of litigation. In addition, slaw moving and/or
ponded water can became a breeding<ground for mosquitoes. Vector Control has
identified cattails as being a contributing factor in increased mosquito populations.
Facility Protection: Flood control structures are at risk of damage from vegetation.
Trees and shrubs can crack these structures, and their growth can alter the flow of
water to such an extent that high flows can cause erasion and/or structure failure. We
are obligated to protect these structures from such damage. This vegetation can also
hide damage from inspection.
Invasive Weeds: Our flood control facilities are at constant risk of being contaminated
by invasive species through a variety of routes. Homeowners import plants from other
areas that can become serious weeds in aquatic environments. Arundo donax is
introduced into our facilities each year in this way. Boat owners can spread weeds from
areas they visit, into our facilities, when they wash their boats after a trip and this water
then enters our facilities. This may be the way Purple Loosestrife was introduced into
�#-38
IPM TASK FORCE 2003 ANNUAL REPORT
Las Trampas and Walnut Creeks. Other weeds enter our facilities from adjacent
properties and through tidal action.
Open Space/Endangered Species Protection: Reducing the danger of fire, and
preventing the spread of noxious and invasive weeds, protects adjacent open space
and endangered species habitat.
Economics: 'Firerisk reduction, structure protection, flood prevention, and invasive
species control all work to protect the economic interests of the county and its citizens.
Control Methods Considered
Do Nothing: 'There are only a few places where we are not obligated to control
vegetation to some degree or another. Where possible, we will do nothing.
Exclusion: While exclusion is a component of IPM, our department has no legal
authority to restrict the importation of weeds or weed seed Into the county. We do use
Certified Seed to insure that we are not introducing weeds into our facilities. We monitor
our facilities for the presence of newly introduced weeds. We also'clean>our equipment
to prevent the spread of weeds from one site to another.
Outreach/Education: Our department has developed literature on pesticide
alternatives and disposal in compliance with our Water Quality Control Board Permit.
Department staff also answers'inquires from the public.
Mechanical: This method includes discing/#illing, mowing, weedeating and hand
removal, and chainsaw/polesawuse.
• Discing and tilling are not appropriate weed control methods in our flood control
facilities'. These methods can increase erosion and damage our.facilities. These
methods may also be Illegal where endangered species are present.
• MowinQ with a tractor-mounted mower is used in a number of our facilities. This
method is less expensive than using weedeaters and hand tools, but is more
expensive than using herbicides.
• Weedeaters and hand tools are used where other weed control methods are
inappropriate. This is an expensive method with a high rate of worker's
compensation claims. Our department spent $600,000 on this activity in the
2002-03 fiscal year. This amount would have been higher if we were not able to
rely on the inmate crew coming out of Marsh Creek Detention Facility.
• Chain saws and pole prunners are used to trim or remove trees and shrubs
growing in flood control facilities.
Cultural: This method is related to habitat modification. Mitigation plantings have been
placed in some of our facilities, but this usually requires that a facility be enlarged. Where
possible we trim vegetation to maximize the benefits of competition from native vegetation.
Grazing: We have utilized grazing in a few of our facilities. We have used goats to
remove cattails from some of the flood control basins in Oakley. There are limitations to
using this method. Goats can't graze' in deep water. They will eat desirable vegetation
4-39
...........-.... ................... ............ ............ ...... ......I......-...... .......-.....
IPM TASK FORCE 2003 ANNUAL REPORT
such as trees and shrubs if given the opportunity. Their excrement enters these water
systems. Cattle have grazed in Pine Creek Basin and an attached parcel, but their use
is faced by these same limitations.
Controlled Burn: As with our roads, we do not conduct controlled bums in flood control
facilities due to the risk of damage to surrounding homes, businesses, and open space.
Our facilities are not large and isolated enough to use this method effectively.
Habitat Modification: Habitat modification' is very expensive in existing facilities
because this usually requires the purchase of surrounding property, as well as permits
to design and reconstruct them. The proper design of new facilities could substantially
reduce the need to control vegetation, but will require higher construction costs.
Mulch: Mulch is useful in flat areas outside of the channel itself (ex: along access
roads) but is not useful where winter rains will wash it downstream. We are using our
limited supply of mulch around landscaping and along some access roads.
Biological: There are few biological controls for the weeds we control, and their use in
these facilities might have unintended consequences. For instance, we need to control
cattails in many of our facilities, but we would not want to introduce an organism that
might kill.them throughout a watershed.
Herbicides: We use herbicides in a variety of applications. Many trees and shrubs will
grow back when cut down. We try to treat the "cut stump" directly in order to prevent re-
growth and the need to cut this vegetation again and again.
Cattails growing in most of our facilities must be controlled or removed each year'.
Manual removal of cattails is expensive and results in numerous worker's compensation
claims. Manual cutting of cattails is not effective if done prior to mid September, which is
a further limitation. The attached analysis of the cost to control cattails by manual
removal, versus the use of herbicides, demonstrates why our preferred method of
controlling this weed is chemical.
We conduct some general weed abatement in our flood control facilities where it is
substantially more efficient, or where it reduces the risk of employee injury.
IPM Decision Process
The necessity of vegetation management activities in flood control facilities is
determined through consultation with the Flood Control Supervisor, Flood <Control
engineers, and the Vegetation Management staff. When the necessity and level of
activity is determined, the control method is then chosen.
Our supply of mulch, labor, and budget are limited. Our ability to control weeds is further
limited by the effectiveness of a method on a specific target, and the time that the method is
effective.All of these limitations are considered when choosing a control method.
We have chosen to utilize a mix of manual weed abatement, grazing, and chemical
weed control. We try to use manual weed abatement and grazing where they will be
-40
................ ...... ..................
...............
..............................................................................................................................................................................
... ... ..............
IPM TASK FORCE 2003 ANNUAL REPORT
efficient and where our budget allows. We use chemical weed control where our budget
is tight, and where manual weed abatement is more likely to result in..injury. As stated
above, some weeds can only be controlled effectively with herbicides.. In fact, manual
weed abatement can actually spread or favor certain invasive weeds.such as Arundo
and Perennial Pepperweed.
Emerging Issues
Of all of our vegetation management programs, those conducted in our flood control
facilities are subject to the greatest regulation, and potentially to the greatest change.
As such, we conduct the majority of our research in these areas. Our aquatic
applications are monitored by a third party Environment Engineering firm to obtain an
unbiased opinion of our operations. This monitoring has demonstrated that our spray
program has not adversely affected water quality. This year, we intend to expand the
testing of water quality to include the impacts of grazing, and the manual removal of
cattails. To our knowledge, no other agency has attempted to test the relative effects of
these different control methods.
The number of species in our facility that are listed as endangered or threatened
continues to expand. In some cases we have had to alter our maintenance practices. In
other cases, our maintenance practices have had a beneficial effect upon these
species.
We continue to examine the interaction of the design of a flood control facility and the
level of maintenance required for that facility. This issue is complicated by the need of
each facility to meet the needs of many stakeholders, and the financial limitations
imposed on each project.
We continue to conduct research authorized by the California Department of Pesticide
Regulation.We have studied new products and techniques in an effort to improve safety
and efficiency,
Ill. Real Propeirty
Objectives
The Public Works Department controls vegetation growing on a variety of property owned
by the county. These properties include: Buchanan and Byron Airfields, the former
Southern Pacific Right-of-Way, and a variety of road widening and flood control related
parcels. We control this vegetation in order to (1) reduce the danger of.fires,- (2) control
invasive and noxious weeds, (3)reduce citizen complaints, and (4) reduce county liability.
Description of Problem
Fire: Annual weeds growing on county owned parcels present a. fire hazard to
surrounding homes, businesses, and facilities. Fire District regulations require that
4-41
................ .............. ........................................--.......................................................................................................... ...........- ..........I.............I ...................
...................-...............................................
IPM TASK FORCE 2003 ANNUAL REPORT
these properties be abated by the property owner, or the Fire District will have this work
done at the expense of the owner.
F.A.A. regulations require specific levels of vegetation management on airports and
clear areas. These regulations address visibility and fire related risks.
Invasive Weeds: County parcels can act as a conduit for the spread of noxious and
invasive weeds. We attempt to control these weeds to prevent their spread to other
areas.
Citizen Complaints: Properties located adjacent to homes and businesses generate
complaints when they are weedy and messy. These conditions also increase the
likelihood that illegal dumping of trash and debris will occur.
Economics: Our operations attempt to address all of these concerns, with the overall
-objective of reducing the exposure of the county to financial liability.
Control Methods Considered
Do nothing: Where possible, we try to avoid having to abate weeds on these properties
in order to reduce our expenditures. This option is. seldom available to us because of
the risks associated with doing nothing.
Exclusion: Pest exclusion is not under the jurisdiction of our department. This method
would not address fire abatement concerns. We clean our equipment to prevent the
spread of weeds from one property to another.
Outreach/Education: Our department has developed literature on pesticide
alternatives and disposal in compliance with our Water Quality Control Board permit.
We also answer inquires from the public.
Mechanical: This method includes discing/til ling, mowing, weedeating and hand
removal, and chainsaw/poleprunner use.
• Discing and-tilling-are not appropriate weed control methods on most of our
properties. These methods can increase erosion and damage our facilities.
These methods may also be illegal where endangered species are present.
• Mowing with a tractor-mounted mower is used in a number of our facilities. This
method is less expensive than using weedeaters and hand tools, but is more
expensive than using herbicides in most cases.
• Weedeaters and hand tools are used where other weed control methods are
inappropriate. This is an expensive method with a high rate of worker's
compensation claims. d shrubs
• Chain saws and Dole prunners are used to trim or remove trees an
growing in flood control facilities.
Cultural: This method is related to habitat modification. Some parcels have been
planted with trees and shrubs, but this requires a funding source. These planting still
require maintenance.
4-42
................ ..............I--............... ...............................................................
''I'll,... ........................................................................I............I.......................................I..............-............................
.................................................................
IPM TASK FORCE 2003 ANNUAL REPORT
Grazing: Due to the number and size of these parcels, grazing is not a viable option for
vegetation management in these areas.
Controlled Burn: Due to the proximity of homes, businesses, and open space,
controlled burning is not a good choice for vegetation management in these areas.
Habitat Modification: Habitat modification on these properties usually consists of some
sort of construction project or the sale of the parcel. These options are not in our
control. We have been able to re-grade a few sites in order to improve drainage and
reduce weed growth.
Mulch: We have used mulch on a few parcels to control weeds. This method is limited
by the availability of clean mulch.
Biological: As discussed earlier, biological weed control is not an effective tool for
weed control in these areas. Only a few select weeds can be controlled by this method.
Herbicides: We spray some of our parcels after consulting with our weed abatement
personnel. A combination of mowing and spraying of herbicides is often used to properly
maintain these areas. For instance, we may spray weeds along our fencelines in order to
create a clean firebreak, and mow the remainder of a site. At other'sites we mow first, and
then-spot-spray late emerging weeds that are not controlled effectively by mowing.
IPM Decision Process
As mentioned previously, our department utilizes the enclosed Weed Control Decision
Chart developed by our department. We inspect and evaluate sites throughout the year.
We also respond to Fire District abatement notices, citizen complaints, and requests
from Airport staff. Our personnel receive continuing education each year to keep up with
changes in this industry.
Prior to deciding how a site will be managed, it is evaluated for potential hazards and
limitations. Climate, budget, personnel, equipment, and biological limitations are
considered before a control method is chosen. We do not make weed management
decisions based on the calendar alone.
Due to the size, type, and location of these sites, the cost difference between control
methods is not as easy to generalize. Our spray operations are highly effective and
economical at some sites, and less so at others. We try to match the best overall
method to each site.
Emerging Issues
The availability of funds, public concem surrounding pesticide use, and increasing
urbanization all affect pest control decisions. In the future we may be forced to abate weeds
in a less cost-effective manner. Funding availability may force us to make cost-effectiveness
our top priority. Regulatory changes will continue to be addressed as they arise.
4-43