Forestry trying to spray Glysophate herbicides around Squamish, hope and aggasiz area

[Livewire322]

Labeling this with the "moderate risk" as you have is delusional.
The risks are FAR greater than you allude to.

It is a known carcinogen. As are nitrosamines, that doesn’t mean I’m going to stop eating smoked meats, though.

The poison spray directly removes food & habitat for all ungulates and much MUCH more. Forage that wouldn’t exist had we not gone in a cut down the forest from the area.

The runoff into creeks, streams and rivers has major deleterious effects on aquatic life right from the bottom end up to the top. BTW, you better hope you are sourcing your drinking water from any water body receiving this poison. The poison is in the dose. Sure, there will likely be effects when (not if) the stuff gets into the water - im not denying that - reading through the plan, it seems like there are reasonable measures that will be put in place to mitigate the chances of it happening, though.

A forest without diversity is simply a tree FARM, not a forest. Looks like you’ve found a good campaign slogan!

There are so many things wrong with this undertaking I cannot believe anyone who considers themselves an outdoorsman could support it in any way shape or form. You best believe it - and one that actively hunts the impacted regions to boot!
I’m seeing much indignation from folks on this topic, with a distinct absence of any commercially viable alternative plans to keep forestry going being put forth.

Disgusted. Likewise. Although, my disgust is directed towards any and all that point out problems without also coming to the table with a solution - care to share yours?

Nog

cheers,
Livewire

[IronNoggin]

Hate to say it, but you certainly do come across as an Industry Shill.

Although, my disgust is directed towards any and all that point out problems without also coming to the table with a solution - care to share yours?

Smaller cuts. Selective harvest rather than clearcut.
Combined hand and machine clearing of some undesirable species where and when required.

Employ many more folks rather than the handful today.
And a much more sustainable route to follow than the one you are advocating.

Cheers,
Nog

[Livewire322]

Hate to say it, but you certainly do come across as an Industry Shill.
And you come across as someone more at home in the Fairy Creek or the Wetsuweten protest camps than on a hunting forum. It must be nice to have benefitted from decades of a strong Canadian economy, driven by thriving industry, only to look back now and poo-poo on the generations behind you for wanting to benefit from the same thriving industry. Are you by chance a Boomer? ‘Cause you sure fit the bill.

Smaller cuts. Selective harvest rather than clearcut.
Combined hand and machine clearing of some undesirable species where and when required.
Which is detailed in the Pest Management Plan…

Employ many more folks rather than the handful today.
And a much more sustainable route to follow than the one you are advocating.

Right on, lead with that next time - it’ll help you not come across as a no-mind environmentalist twat.
Cheers,
Nog

cheers,
Livewire

[IronNoggin]

I'll add obviously entitled to the Industry Shill tag.

Hunted more, and killed more critters across 3 continents than you have ever even seen.
And the farthest away from a "no mind environmentalist twat" that you have ever run in to.

Carry on,
You are somewhat humorous...
In a disgusting kind of way...

Nog

[Livewire322]

I'll add obviously entitled to the Industry Shill tag.

Hunted more, and killed more critters across 3 continents than you have ever even seen.
Ok, Boomer. Like I wrote, you benefitted from decades of strong industry and now take issue with those of us who hope to do the same. If that doesn’t make you the entitled one, I don’t know what does.


And the farthest away from a "no mind environmentalist twat" that you have ever run in to.
Based on your many posts over the years that I have read I’d typically agree that you aren’t a no-mind environmentalist twat, quite the contrary. But on this topic you come across as an arrogant ass, calling people shills, and less interested in solutions than problems.

If, after a lifetime of successful hunting across three continents, I’m as crotchety of an old coot as you come across as here, I’ll have some serious soul searching to do on what I define as success - cause it sure ain’t measured in the number of animals seen and dropped.

Carry on,
You are somewhat humorous...
In a disgusting kind of way...

Nog

The PMP linked earlier seems like a solid plan, which addresses many of the issues raised. Maybe you should give it a read.

[IronNoggin]

The PMP linked earlier seems like a solid plan, which addresses many of the issues raised. Maybe you should give it a read.

Already did. A couple of times you pompous ass.

And yeah, I actually did suggest how to make the way forward work.
But your blinders (and what your employers feed you) make you immune to any other way.
Sad.

There are other obvious better ways.
Will that cut into the bottom line? Yep.
However it will employ more workers, and be far better off for the environment overall which collectively is a win win.

If forestry companies can't make their operations viable they shouldn't looking to chemicals to do so.
If forestry companies can't stop negatively impacting the ecosystems they are permitted to harvest in, they shouldn't be given permits to harvest.
At this point it's all about greed, kickbacks, shareholder profits and nothing more.

Perhaps some day you will realize that...
But I am not holding out much hope.

Nog

[caddisguy]

A bit confused about the title of the post ("Forestry trying to spray glyphosate")

Pretty sure they already are and have been for years unless they stopped very recently?

They have been spraying the areas around where I hunt in the Fraser Valley for as long as I have been hunting. They usually spray in the spring and warning post signage that herbicide has been applied to the area and chemical used (glyphosate)

In the fall they come back with a helicopter and pour baskets of fertilizer over the same areas.

Have there been any recent changes?

[IronNoggin]

... Have there been any recent changes?

No, but there should have been.
They continue to promote the broadcast spaying of a known carcinogen which also happens to carry other rather serious deleterious effects on a wide variety of environmental parameters in order to create monocultural stands of timber.

Look, I am not opposed to logging, when proper forestry practices are adhered to.
I have a good number of Buddies who are employed both directly and indirectly in the related industries.
However even the majority of them suggest that if they are to remain sustainable, forestry practices will eventually have to evolve towards selective logging (such as is practiced in numerous European countries) rather than the wide ranging clear cuts of today. I obviously agree with that assessment.

Part of the reason I agree with that is I have personally seen the destruction occurring behind the gates all over Vancouver Island. It is truly disturbing.

The application of this herbicide is entirely geared towards habitat modification in the favor of monocultural stand support of the current clear cut practices here. It has wide ranging effects, and a host of them are quite negative. Mechanical and at times hand thinning present an alternative, however is more expensive in terms of the required additional workforce and equipment. All boils down to increased profits, at the expense of the environment. I am no tree hugger, but not only do the animals I like to hunt, fish and eat rely on that habitat, so do I. Therefore this is a matter of concern for me.

Apologies to Livewire. I got a little heated and reacted in a rather over-the-top manner. While we may disagree on this particular matter, I am certain there are many we share the same views on...

Cheers,
Nog

[IronNoggin]

Rod Cumberland - Presentation on the effects of glyphosate on deer

[Livewire322]

No, but there should have been.
They continue to promote the broadcast spaying of a known carcinogen which also happens to carry other rather serious deleterious effects on a wide variety of environmental parameters in order to create monocultural stands of timber.

Look, I am not opposed to logging, when proper forestry practices are adhered to.
I have a good number of Buddies who are employed both directly and indirectly in the related industries.
However even the majority of them suggest that if they are to remain sustainable, forestry practices will eventually have to evolve towards selective logging (such as is practiced in numerous European countries) rather than the wide ranging clear cuts of today. I obviously agree with that assessment.

Part of the reason I agree with that is I have personally seen the destruction occurring behind the gates all over Vancouver Island. It is truly disturbing.

The application of this herbicide is entirely geared towards habitat modification in the favor of monocultural stand support of the current clear cut practices here. It has wide ranging effects, and a host of them are quite negative. Mechanical and at times hand thinning present an alternative, however is more expensive in terms of the required additional workforce and equipment. All boils down to increased profits, at the expense of the environment. I am no tree hugger, but not only do the animals I like to hunt, fish and eat rely on that habitat, so do I. Therefore this is a matter of concern for me.

Apologies to Livewire. I got a little heated and reacted in a rather over-the-top manner. While we may disagree on this particular matter, I am certain there are many we share the same views on...

Cheers,
Nog

I’ll extend a similar apology - Nog, I lowered the conversation to insults, rather than a discussion of merits, that was wrong and I shouldn’t have done so. Over the years, you have posted some great content on this site, put folks on the path for advocating for their outdoor rights/privileges (inviting us to seminars and such), and you seem to be a great advocate of the outdoors-people community.

While we might not agree on the immediate solution for this topic, I don’t think we are far off on the big picture. To be clear, I’m not keen on herbicide use in the spots that I actively hunt and I agree that there are optimizations that can and should be made to forestry practices. That written, I am cognizant of the impacts of restricting industry too tightly, too quickly - be it port/transport infrastructure, mines, pipelines, forestry, aquaculture, etc… - after all, everything is driven by profits, and when those profits get thin, so do employment opportunities.
Ideally, government will force change (or continue to, depending on how cynical you are) in industry to slowly drive to more sustainable practices.

While herbicides are the primary focus of the Pest Management Plan, mechanical/machine grubbing are also mentioned as methods that are currently used.
I view the PMP as a control of known risks. While I'm not employed in forestry, I do work on major infrastructure and mining projects, so I understand what it is to control/balance risks - i.e., an exercise in having your cake and eating it too.