Amid some lingering concerns, an Outside company is set to spray herbicide on parts of the train tracks outside Skagway later this month. The company hired for the task recently changed the brand of weed killer it’ll use because of local restrictions.
Skagway borough manager Scott Hahn says he has no hesitation about the one-day spraying of intrusive and obstructive weeds on the White Pass and Yukon Route Railroad tracks. The company, DBi Services out of Pennsylvania, announced in late May that they would no longer use Roundup, which includes a chemical banned by the municipality. Instead they’ll use Oust, made by DuPont. Its main ingredient, sulfometuron methyl, is not on the Skagway Borough’s list of unapproved herbicides. Here’s Hahn.
“I think anyone that hears the word herbicide, they get nervous in general,” he says. “There’s nothing more being done, basically we’ve done what’s required. We informed them what’s prohibited and apparently they’re going to comply with that. I haven’t heard anybody say anything about meetings or that the city should do anything different, or anything else.”
The issue came up a couple of years ago when White Pass announced its intention to spray the tracks with Roundup. But there was public outcry because of fear that Roundup’s active ingredient is carcinogenic. So, White Pass suspended the spraying indefinitely. Shortly after that, an ordinance was introduced and approved by the assembly to limit which chemicals could be sprayed. DBi posted its intention to once again spray Roundup on the tracks a few weeks ago, which spurred concern at a recent assembly meeting. The company was informed of the municipal code revision, and together with White Pass, decided on using Oust instead.
Assemblyman Steve Burnham Jr. said at Thursday’s assembly meeting, using a different agent on the weeds is better, but still not great.
“In some sense that’s a good thing, but in others, it’s still a concern because the municipality has waivers regarding discharges in the area for our drinking water.”
Burnham says any mass discharge might force the borough to give up those waivers and have to start testing the drinking water more regularly.
“And even potentially have to build a treatment plant. So, there are potential grave costs to this intent.”
Skagway resident Gary Hansen also voiced his concern at the meeting.
“I understand the economic factors at play here,” Hansen says. “I’m sure it’s a lot cheaper for them to spray rather than use mechanical means to spray the rather use mechanical means to remove the weeds, but I question the value judgment they’re putting money ahead potential health hazard.”
But White Pass’s Tyler Rose says mechanical means can’t be used to remove the weeds in this case.
“There are several issues as far as vegetative growth in the right-of-way,” Rose says. “One of which is just for visual inspection and the ability to see. But one of the larger issues is having sufficient drainage and support for the roadbed itself. Weed whacking and mechanical means taking that away across the top don’t meet those goals because you still have the roots inside of the roadbed, so that’s where it’s problematic.”
Rose says the area in question is a federal right-of-way, so technically White Pass is not required to adhere to borough code. But, they will follow local rules because they want to ease residents’ concerns.
The need for the weed abatement comes from the Federal Railroad Administration. Karin Hendrickson works for the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation’s Pesticide Control Program. She says weeds that obstruct the path of the train can cause hazardous conditions, especially beefier varieties like willow.
“They have very strict requirements about vegetation and what can be growing on the tracks – there are safety reasons and maintenance reasons,” she explains. “With our long summers and our growing season, the vegetation gets a root-hold and you can’t keep it within their specifications easily.”
According to Hendrickson, the chemicals used in Oust are not necessarily more benign than those in Roundup, they just act in a different way. The ingredients in Oust don’t hang around as long, which can be good and bad.
“However that may mean that you have to spray more of something because, you know, six weeks later you’ve got more plants growing. Whereas something that sticks around a lot longer, it may work longer, meaning you have to apply less. So there are tradeoffs to different products.”
White Pass and DBi are hosting public forum to address herbicide questions on June 16 at the AB Hall from 5 – 7 p.m. Spraying will happen for one day during the following week, though Rose says a final date has not yet been set.
KHNS attempted to contact me last Monday, June 6, for an interview, presumably about White Pass’ intent to use herbicide along its right-of-way. It is unfortunate that I was working—out of cell range—because, by the time I finished my shift, KHNS had already published the article online and likely on air. https://khns.org/white-pass-herbicide-spraying-set-for-this-month-with-borough-approved-weed-killer
Despite the title, the KHNS article does not explain how or when the borough approved the weed killer. In fact, the Skagway Borough Assembly DID NOT approve or disapprove the use of weed killer. Simply because an herbicide does not fall within the bounds of the municipality’s restricted herbicide list, does not mean it has obtained “borough-approval.” I feel the headline is misleading.
Below is a list of points where minor research of the issue, on behalf of the media, could have taken less than half a day. Had KHNS given me a chance to respond before releasing their article, these are points I could have provided. Note that I did the following research myself, and am not speaking on behalf of the Municipality or for the Mayor or Assembly.
1. One of the reasons this became an issue, in 2014, was that a mass discharge of herbicide could effect the quality of Skagway drinking water, and cause the municipality to lose our water waiver, which could be costly. It could also force Skagway to need to start treating and filtering its drinking water.
1,A. In a 2004 vulnerability assessment for the Skagway Water System conducted by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, it was noted that, “The rail corridor and railroad yard represent the greatest risk of synthetic organic chemicals to this public water system.” It goes on to state that, “After combining the contaminant risk for synthetic organic chemicals with the natural susceptibility of the well, the overall vulnerability of the well to contamination is high.” http://www.skagway.org/vertical/sites/%7B7820C4E3-63B9-4E67-95BA-7C70FBA51E8F%7D/uploads/7D.1_Appendix_A_2004_Source_Water_Assessment(1).pdf According to the Skagway Water Department, there is a high probability that anything discharged or sprayed in the rail corridor, eventually ends up in the river, and thereby, Skagway’s aquifer.
1,B. An EPA Reregistration Eligibility Decision from 2008 (on Sulphometuron Methyl the chemical in OUST) states that “Sulfometuron methyl is expected to be relatively persistent in soil and water (half-life ranging from about 2 weeks to 6 months, depending on environmental conditions).” https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/chem_search/reg_actions/reregistration/red_PC-122001_18-Sep-08.pdf
1,C. There are over one hundred culverts, along 18 miles of track, between the White Pass shops and the summit, and ditch line drainage throughout. The entire drainage system leads to the Skagway River.
1,D. It seems that OUST, if applied during the summer, may not be an appropriate herbicide to deal with equisetum (horse tail), but rather a November spraying was indicated to be more effective, according to an article by Robert Parker, at the Irrigated Agriculture Research and Extension Center, who cited trials at the Washington State University Mount Vernon Research and Extension Center. This makes me wonder how much thought has been put into this by White Pass.
2. Regarding White Pass representatives comments (in the KHNS article), on vegetative growth in the right-of-way:
2,A. White Pass does not mention whether or not they have conducted a ballast fouling test. I suspect the results of a ballast fouling test would conclude that the ballast is contaminated (with dirt, oil, metal dust, etc) for much of the length of the U.S. track. The weeds and grass follow the lack of drainage, not the other way around.
2,A,a. White Pass indicates that mechanical cutting of weeds is not adequate “because you still have the roots inside of the roadbed.” No amount of herbicide is going to clean fouled ballast either; killing a plant does not remove the dead root from the railbed, instead the root will decompose, further fouling the ballast, and the lack of drainage will persist. Weeds and grass would not thrive in clean ballast, and are merely an indicator that there is something else wrong with the substrate.
2,A,b. The only way to improve drainage is to clean or replace the fouled ballast, and keep the ditch lines and culverts clear.
2,A,c. Spraying herbicide will increase immediate chances of fire hazard, not decrease them. The dead weeds and grass will dry out, increasing the chance of ignition.
2,A,d. The best solution is to eliminate the fouled ballast by cleaning or ballast replacement. Ditch lines would still need excavation to keep back infiltration of brush.
2,A,e. All spraying will do is temporarily improve visibility, the weed problem will resurface.
3. Skagway Municipal Code (SMC) 8.10.050(E) “Prohibited,” states that: “No drift, runoff or application of any pesticide, herbicide, or fertilizer shall be permitted onto any adjacent land or property of another.” It does not limit this designation to the restricted herbicide list. I fail to see how White Pass will prevent the inevitable run-off from entering the Skagway River.
4. The assertion that due to federal regulation, White Pass is not required to adhere to borough code, does not adequately explain the nuance of the regulation. FRA Part 213 requires the railroad to “control vegetation” for listed reasons. It doe not dictate how the vegetation should be controlled. So, yes they need to do something about the vegetation, but they are not required to use herbicide and are very likely not exempted from SMC. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/213.37
*Note: It seems that White Pass may have changed their original herbicide of choice, Roundup, due SMC. Here is a quick summary of how the code functions in regard to a restricted chemical.
Roundup is an herbicide that contains a chemical called Glyphosate, which is restricted by SMC 8.10. According to code, the property owner or a licensed commercial applicator may apply a yearly total amount of up to two gallons of liquid form pre-mixed restricted herbicide products, in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions, to the total sum of their properties—this would include glyphosate. If the property area to be treated exceeds 10,000 square feet, the applicator must attain a waiver, which includes a mandatory public hearing. A restricted herbicide may not receive a waiver if the intent is for use within 300 “linear feet of a tributary, creek, stream, river, lake, or drainage ditch.” In sum, Roundup is not banned, it is a restricted herbicide. http://www.codepublishing.com/AK/Skagway/?Skagway08/Skagway0810.html
The headline has now been changed.