Sustainable TamAlmonte et al 215 Julia Ave. Mill Valley, CA 94941 [email protected] July 6, 2015 James Raives Marin County Open Space District 3501 Civic Center Drive, Suite 260 San Rafael, CA 94903-4157 (415) 473-3745 (Tel) (415) 473-3795 (Fax) [email protected] Re: Public Comment on the Draft Marin County Open Space District Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan and the Draft Marin County Open Space District Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan Tiered Program Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2013112063). We write on behalf of Sustainable TamAlmonte, Watershed Alliance of Marin, Health and Habitat, Inc., Moms Advocating Sustainability, Turning Green, Gallinas Watershed Council, Marin Water Coalition, Sustainable Homestead Valley and ourselves to comment on the Draft Marin County Open Space District Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan (“Project”) and the Draft Marin County Open Space District Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan Tiered Program Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2013112063). Sustainable TamAlmonte is a group of Tam Valley and Almonte residents who want to preserve and enhance the environmental qualities of their unique bayside communities and Marin County as a whole. The members of Sustainable TamAlmonte support truly sustainable land use and vegetation management in Marin and particularly in the Tamalpais Community Services District and the Almonte Sanitary District of Unincorporated Marin, and have grave concerns about the environmental, health and safety impacts that result from poor land use and vegetation management planning, including environmentally detrimental projects. Therefore, Sustainable TamAlmonte has a strong interest in enforcing environmental laws to protect 1 the valuable environmental resources of Marin County, including the Tam Valley and Almonte communities, and the health and safety of current and future residents. Watershed Alliance of Marin (WAM), a 501c3 project of MarinLink, is a network of advocacy, education, and land conservation organizations who work to protect and restore Marin County’s watersheds and the native wildlife nourished by our natural heritage. Health & Habitat, Inc. is a 501c3 incorporated in 1987. It promotes a holistic approach to life, health and the environment, and helps to achieve a healthy state of equilibrium through education, research and conservation of natural resources, and public charity. It disseminates information in the public interest concerning the above subjects through, but not limited to, lectures, publications, and other media. MOMS Advocating Sustainability (MOMAS) is a group of mothers and families committed to creating healthy communities for children by reducing the use of household and environmental toxins. Turning Green is a student led global movement devoted to education and advocacy around environmentally sustainable and socially responsible choices for individuals, schools, and communities. TG seeks to engage youth in the transition from conventional to conscious living, empowering this generation and mobilizing action to sustain a healthy planet. The Gallinas Watershed Council’s mission is to: Connect the people who live and work in Las Gallinas Valley with their creek and watershed; Advance local conservation action; and Promote watershed restoration, protection and education. We are a fiscally sponsored 501c3 of MarinLink. As watershed advocates, we are committed to environmental protection and reducing the use to toxic chemicals in all areas. The Marin Water Coalition (MWC) is an environmental organization affiliated with the Social Justice Center of Marin (see SJCM.org under task forces), which has been active in monitoring MMWD policies with regard to water conservation and watershed management and efficiencies, as well as in opposing the proposed San Rafael desalination plant on environmental grounds. 2 Working locally, Sustainable Homestead Valley represents the Homestead Valley Community on issues of economic and environmental sustainability by bringing neighbors together, raising awareness, and advocating for all life and future generations. I. INTRODUCTION We share Rachel Carson’s concerns expressed in her book “Silent Spring” (1962)1 about the human health effects and environmental impacts caused by the use of pesticides. We also support the Precautionary Principle. The Introduction of the Marin Countywide Plan states; “The Precautionary Principle, another conceptual framework considered during the preparation of the Plan, carries the sense of foresight and preparation, and is the common-sense idea behind many adages: ‘Be careful’, ‘Better safe than sorry’; ‘Look before you leap’; ‘First, do no harm’. The precautionary principle is an approach characterized by minimizing or eliminating potential hazards at the onset of an activity instead of the approach that determines an ‘acceptable level of harm’.”2 We are therefore concerned about the DRAFT Marin County Open Space Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan’s (“Project”) wide use of a number of herbicide products to control weeds and clear vegetation for fire safety. We are further concerned that the DRAFT Marin County Open Space District (MCOSD) Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan (VBMP) Tiered Program Environmental Impact Report (DRAFT TPEIR) fails to apply the Precautionary Principle and fails to adequately address the Project’s potentially significant impacts with respect to toxic herbicides. CEQA has two basic purposes, neither of which the DRAFT Marin County Open Space District (MCOSD) Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan (VBMP) (“Project”) Tiered Program Environmental Impact Report (DRAFT TPEIR) satisfies. First, CEQA is designed to inform decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project.3 The EIR is the 1 Carson, R., 1962. Silent Spring. Houghton Mifflin. 2 Marin County Community Development Agency, 2007. Marin Countywide Plan. Marin County. Pg. 1.3-11 3 14 Cal. Code Regs. (“CEQA Guidelines”) § 15002(a)(1). 3 “heart” of this requirement.4 The EIR has been described as “an environmental ‘alarm bell’ whose purpose it is to alert the public and its responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached ecological points of no return.”5 Second, CEQA directs public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage when possible by requiring alternatives or mitigation measures.6 The DRAFT TPEIR fails to satisfy these purposes by failing to disclose, accurately identify and adequately analyze, including improperly deferring the analysis of, all potentially significant environmental impacts of the Draft Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan, and failing to provide adequate mitigation measures to avoid impacts. As a result, the DRAFT TPEIR fails as an informational document and falls short of CEQA’s mandates. II. THE DRAFT TPEIR FAILS TO DISCLOSE, ANALYZE AND MITIGATE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH GLYPHOSATE AND COMMERCIAL GLYPHOSATE HERBICIDE FORMULATIONS The DRAFT TPEIR fails to disclose, analyze and mitigate potentially significant environmental impacts from glyphosate and commercial glyphosate herbicide formulations because it does not properly describe the herbicide and the formulations and fails to properly disclose and analyze the toxicity, non-target impacts, high activity and mobility, and fire risk of glyphosate and glyphosate herbicide formulations. The DRAFT TPEIR (Page 248) describes Glyphosate; “Glyphosate is generally the first choice herbicide due to its low toxicity and low risk of non-target impacts due to the lack of activity in the soil.”7 In Appendix E Herbicide Use of the DRAFT TPEIR, the highest toxicity score assigned to Glyphosate is “3” (moderately toxic). 4 No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68, 84. 5 County of Inyo v. Yorty (1973) 32 Cal.App.3d 795, 810. 6 CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a)(2) and (3) (See also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564; Laurel Heights Improvement Ass’n v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 400.). 7 Nichols, Berman. Draft Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan Draft Tiered Program Environmental Impact Report. Marin County Open Space District. 2015: Pg. 248. 4 The above description is incorrect. Glyphosate is highly and very highly toxic, according to U.S. EPA’s Toxicity Scores (See Exhibit 5.5-5 below)8, and chronically toxic. Glyphosate can have high activity and movement in the soil, depending on conditions, as well as in air and water. Glyphosate use has a significant risk of non-target impacts. Moreover, glyphosate is a patented desiccant and could greatly increase the risk of fire. A. The Draft TPEIR Fails To Acknowledge That Glyphosate Is Highly And Chronically Toxic And Commercial Glyphosate Herbicide Formulations Are More Toxic Independent studies show that glyphosate, the active ingredient in glyphosate herbicide formulations identified for use in the Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan (AquaMaster, Rodeo, and Roundup Custom), is highly and very highly toxic, in accordance with U.S. EPA’s Toxicity Scores (See Exhibit 5.5-5)9, and chronically toxic. According to genetic engineers John Fagan, PhD, Michael Antoniou, PhD, and Claire Robinson, MPhil; “Commercial glyphosate herbicide formulations contain extra added ingredients (adjuvants) and are more toxic than glyphosate alone.”10 “The added ingredients (adjuvants) are toxic11