HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-03-21 ENR Packet
AGENDA
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCE COMMISSION
March 21, 2011
7 p.m.
Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall
1830 County Road BEast
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes: January 13, 2011
5. New Business
a. Maplewood Shoreland/Wetland Regulations - Capstone Project Review (10 min.)
b. GreenStep Cities Program - Sustainability Intern Project Review (5 min.)
c. Eureka Recycling Year End Report (30 min.)
d. Western Hills Area Street Improvement Project - Wetland Impacts (30 min.)
e. Annual Report (15 min.)
6. Unfinished Business
a. Emerald Ash Borer Plan (60 min.)
b. 2011 Goals -Implementation Strategies (10 min.)
'7, Visitor Presentations
8. Commission Presentations
9. Staff Presentations
a. Collection System Analysis Update
b. Renewable Energy Ordinance Update
c. Chicken Ordinance Update
d. Recycling in the Parks Update
e. Mow-Hi Pledge
f. Maplewood Nature Center Programs
10. Adjourn
(Approximate times given)
Agenda Item 4
MINUTES
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
7:00 p.m., Thursdav; January 13, 2011
Council Chambers, City Hall
1830 County Road BEast
A. CALL TO ORDER
A meeting of the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chair Trippler.
B. ROLL CALL
Dale Trippler, Chair
Randee Edmundson, Commissioner
Judith Johannessen, Commissioner
Carole Lynne, Commissioner
Carol Mason Sherrill, Commissioner
Bill Schreiner, Commissioner
Ginny Yingling, Commissioner
Staff Present
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
Ann Hutchinson, Maplewood Nature Cen
Virginia Gaynor, Natural Resources Coor'
C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Staff added under Staff Pre
Mall Storm Water Impro~.
"iL
Commissioner Johannesse'
Commission to the City Cou
wable Energy Ordinance Update and Maplewood
under Commission presentations - Relationship of the ENR
Commissioner Johannessen moved to approve the aQenda as amended.
Seconded by Commissioner Mason Sherrill.
Ayes - All
The motion passed.
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Johannessen had a correction to page 3, item G., 1. in the 4th line, City of ~
should say City of Benicia.
Commissioner Yingling moved to approve the December g. 2010. Environmental and Natural
Resources Commission MeetinQ Minutes as amended.
Seconded by Commissioner Schreiner.
The motion passed.
Ayes - All
January 13, 2011
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes
1
E. NEW BUSINESS
1. Election of Chair and Vice Chair
Environmental Planner Finwall gave a brief report indicating the ENR Commission
ordinance requires that the commission appoint a chair and vice chair to run the meetings
annually. In 2010 the chair ofthe commission was Dale Trippler and the vice chair was
Bill Schreiner.
Commissioner Schreiner nominated Chair Trippler to remain the chair.
Commissioner Johannessen nominated Commissioner Schreiner to be chair.
There was a secret ballot cast by all commissioners. The results were a tie vote, three
votes for Commissioner Trippler and three votes for Commissioner Trippler. Chair
Hippler withdrewhis appointment nomination. Commissioner Schreiner agreed to serve
as the chair of the commission for 2011.
Commissioner Trippler nominated Commissioner Johannessen to be vice chair.
Commissioner Johannessen declined due to pers nal reasons.
Commissioner Trippler nominated Commissi dmundson to be vice chair. There was
an open vote by a show of hands and all Cr ers voted for Commissioner
Edmundson to be vice chair for 2011. ' .' missione mundson agreedto serve as vice
chair of the commission for 2011.
Natural Resource or Gaynor discussed projects she is involved with for 2011.
The ENR Commission nstormed areas they wanted to focus on in 2011. They agreed
that the three goals set for 2010 should be forwarded onto 2011 and work should continue
on those areas including: trash hauling, environmental neighborhood groups, and
greenways. In addition, the commission wants to focus more on environmental education
and promotion of the city's environmental programs. One way to accomplish this is to
have commissioners attend more of the city sponsored events. Additionally, the
cOmmission agreed that they should continue work on the city's shoreland ordinance and
slope/Mississippi Critical Area ordinance in 2011.
Environmental Planner Fin Goal Setting report and answered questions
of the commission.
2. 2011 Goal Setting
Environmental Planner Finwall indicated that she would put together the revised list of
goals and implementation strategies for achieving those goals. This will be brought back
to the commission in February for further discussion.
3. Collection System Analysis Goals and Objectives
Environmental Planner Finwall gave the Collection System Analysis Goals and Objectives
report and answered questions of the commission.
January 13, 2011
Environmentai and Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes
2
Goals and objectives recommended for the city's Collection System Analysis were as
follows:
. Economic
. Cost savings on road repairs and reconstruction.
. Lower cost for residents (cost per household per month) due to competitiYe
bidding.
. Environmental
. To better manage solid waste and recycling.
. Able to direct waste to best environmental destination.
. Less gas and/or diesel burned.
. Less CO2 emitted into the atmosphere.
. Aesthetics/Safety/Service
. Less traffic, noise, and dust.
. Safer streets.
. More consistent and neater looking streets during collection days,
. Greater leverage to correct problems with service.
Commissioner Hippler moved to adopt the Qoals and obiectives as outlined above for the
ciiv's Collection System Analysis.
Ayes-All
Seconded by Commissioner Johannessen
The motion passed.
F. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
G. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Ron Cockriel, 943 Cent
and how the proposed
MNDOT right of way is I
impacts a fire training facil
plewood. Mr. Coc,kriel discussed the city's greenWaYS
ity to be located on Century Avenue on the unused
e of those greenways. Mr. Cockriel discussed the possible
o wetlands might have on the environment.
The commission requested that staff give an update on the fire training facility during the
February meeting.
H. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
1. Relationship of the ENR Commission to the City Council.
Commissioner Johannessen spoke about her disapPointment in the City Council's
decision to contract with Tennis Sanitation for the city's recycling contractor, and not
Eureka Recycling who was recommended by the commission. Commissioner
Johannessenrecommended that a representative of the City Council come toan ENR
meeting to give them direction on what type of advisory role they play and why the
commission's recycling contractor recommendation was not taken,
As the new chair of the commission, Bill Schreiner, indicated he would speak with the City
Council about this issue.
January 13, 2011
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes
3
I. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
1. Maplewood Nature Center Programs
Lead Naturalist Hutchinson gave a brief report regarding programs at the Maplewood
Nature Center and discussed the Nature Center calendar for 2012.
2. Renewable Energy
Environmental Planner Finwall gave a brief update and stated that the Renewable Energy
ordinance will go to the planning commission on January 18, 2011, for their first review.
3. Maplewood Mall Storm Water
Environmental Planner Finwallgave a brief report on the Maplewood Mall Storm Water
project. Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed Districts is undertaking the project along
with the mall, city, and county as part of the stormwater improvements being made for the
White Bear Avenue and County Road D street improvement projects. The watershed
district is requesting at least one volunteer from the commission attend a meeting to
discuss and plan for the proposed interactive displays for the improvements, The meeting
will be held Friday, January 21, 2011, at 1 :00 p Commissioner Mason Sherrill
volunteered to participate in the meeting.
J. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Schreiner adjourned the meeting at g:O
January 13, 2011
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes
4
Agenda Item 5.a.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
Maplewood Shoreland/Wetland Capstone Project
March 11, 2011 for the March 21 ENR Commission Meeting
INTRODUCTION
Students from the University of Maryland University College (UMUC) have offered to provide the
City of Maplewood with an independent analysis of an environmental issue or challenge that the
city is facing as part of their environmental management masters capstone project. The
capstone project would involve four students from various locations throughout the country, with
at least one student located in the Maplewood area. Most of the students are working adults,
some with experience in the environmental field. The final work product is a written report and
recommendations, and a presentation to the Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR)
Commission on the findings. The report will be complete mid-April. .
DISCUSSION
State Shoreland Rules
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) conducted a rulemaking process in
2009 to update the statewide shoreland rules. The draft rules were sent to state agencies for
final review and adoption in 2010. On August 11, 2010, Governor Tim Pawlenty returned the
draft shoreland rules to the DNR for further engagement and discussion, especially with the
2011 Legislature. There is no update on when this process will begin, but once the shoreland
rules are adopted, municipalities will be required to review their shoreland ordinances to ensure
they address the new regulations.
Citv Wetland and Shoreland Ordinances
The city council adopted a new wetland ordinance in December 2009. The ordinance includes
alternative buffer requirements for wetlands adjacent lakes. The alternative buffer requirements
will expire in 2012, or when the city revises the shoreland ordinance to include regulations for
these wetlands, whichever comes first. Because there is no specified timeline for the
completion of the state's shoreland rulemaking, the ENR Commission should review the city's
shoreland ordinance in 2011 to ensure wetlands adjacent lakes are regulated appropriately.
Environmental Manaoement Capstone Proiect
The UMUC students will focus their capstone project on Maplewood's wetland/shoreland
regulations. In particular, the students will compare wetlands adjacent lakes to freestanding
wetlands to determine if they are used or valued differently by the public and study whether the
functions of water quality, ecology, and wildlife habitat are different. Recommendations will
include proposals on the regulation of wetlands adjacent lakes, i.e., regulate the same as
freestanding wetlands, or differently with new regulations included in the shoreland ordinance.
SUMMARY
Jana Haedtke, one of the UMUC environmental management students working on the
capstone project, will be present during the March 21, 2011, ENR Commission meeting to brief
the commission and receive feedback on the Maplewood shoreland/wetland project.
Agenda Item 5.b.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
GreenStep Cities Program - Sustainability Intern Project Review
March 11, 2011 for the March 21 ENR Commission Meeting
INTRODUCTION
Minnesota GreenStep Cities (greenstep.pca.state.mn.us) is a voluntary program administered
by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The program challenges, assists, and
recognizes cities for actions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It is designed to help cities
meet their sustainability goals through implementation of 28 best practices in the area of
building and lighting, land use, transportation, environmental management, and economic and
community development. Each best practice can be implemented by completing one or more
specific actions (depending on size of the city) from a list of four to eight actions. These actions
are tailored to all Minnesota cities, focus on cost savings and energy use reduction, and
encourage innovation.
BACKGROUND
On December 13,2010, the Maplewood City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the City
of Maplewood to participate in the Minnesota GreenStep Cities recognition program.
DISCUSSION
As a participating city in the program, Maplewood must begin implementing best practices in the
areas described above. The first step is to assess best practices completed and determine
which best practices to focus on in 2011. This information is then reported to the GreenStep
Cities coordinators at the MPCA, and implemented into the GreenStep Cities website.
Hlee Moua, University of Minnesota architectural and sustainability studies undergraduate
student, will be completing a three-month internship with the City of Maplewood for a
sustainability studies class. One project Hlee will be working on during the internship is an
assessment and reporting of the city's best practices.
SUMMARY
Hlee Moua, University of Minnesota architectural and sustainability studies undergraduate
student, will be present during the March 21, 2011, ENR Commission meeting to brief the
commission and receive feedback on the GreenStep Cities Program.
City of Maplewood
Year-End Recycling Report 2010
Overview
Since 2006, Eureka Recyclingahd the City of Maplewood partnered to
bring a strong recycling program to residents that focused on making sure
recyclable materials were recycled to their best use, ensured that residents
were educated about what can and cannot be recycled, and recogni2ed the
environmental and economic benefits of recycling. While recycling
remains a strong platform to help save energy and resources, the~e are
exciting and better ways to help reduce the number of new materials that
are produced. Eureka Recycling is a zero-waste organization and by
partnering with us, Maplewood residents had and continue to have access
many zero-waste programs that go well beyond just curbside recycling.
Zero Waste on a Path toward a Sustainability Plan
What is zero waste?
Zero waste means designing and managing materials and resources in ways
that conserve and recover thenl-not. destroying, burying, bumi~g, .or
transfonning our resources by viewing them as merely waste. Zero waste
includes recycling, but goes beyond recycling by looking at the whole flow
ofresources through our society. It means eliminating discharges to land,
water, or air that do not contribute productively to natural systems or the
economy. It means preserving the resilience and long-term health of the
natural systems that supply the resources and materials upon which our
economic prosperity and well-being depend.
In a zero-waste conununity, healthy and sustainable human systems are like
natural cycles, where the outputs are used as an input for another process.
Zero waste saves energy, conserves resourc,es, and provides other
environmental benefits including keeping our water and air healthy.
Working toward zero waste also offers a chance to build conununity.
Recycling holds all these opportunities and benefits, but there arebetter
ways than recycling to get the maximum benefit. These include rethinking
and redesigning first, then reducing, reusing, and composting.
Maplewood is already working toward zero waste. Not only does a
successful recycling program help get to zero waste, but composting and
reuse progralIlS as well as reduction education can be part of a city's
sustainability plan.
(651l222.S0RT (7678)
www.eurekerecycllog.Dfg
Our mission is to reduce
waste todey tI1rough
innovative resource
management and to reach
a.wasfe*free.tornormw
by demonstrating that waste
is pr~ven!lllJle, not inevllalll~.
Atlatflrmati\lUlltlon, equal
oppnmmliyl1mployer.
@Prlfl1eOOn100%pG:S1Cormumer
reeyeled.P8Pt\rtha1.was.prccesmm
wlthOutthe.Qse.ofchlorine.
Reuse
Through funding from Ramsey County, Maplewood residents participate
in the Twin Cities Free Market, a reuse program of Eureka Recycling.
The Twin Cities Free Market is a local website where residents c,an list
items to give away or search for free items available in the conununity. It
is an easy, fast, and free way to give and get reusable items to benefit the
environment, save money and make someone's day. With over 100,000
items saved from the trash to be appreciated in new homes, in many cases
residents are able to find new homes for their items on Twin Cities Free
Market faster than they find a disposal-oriented option.
'jfr "
WWW.
Twin Cities
Free Market
.org
'- '...A
In the Twin Cities metro area, 1 in 6 households use the Free Market as a tool to keep usable
goods out of the waste stream. When items are reused, the need to manufacture new products is
reduced, and they are prevented from being wasted~aving energy, protecting air and water
quality, preserving the environment, and protecting our health.
Composting
Maplewood introduced another step toward zero waste to its residents a few years ago. Along
with a city sale of backyard compost bins, the city has encouraged residents to take their discards
into their own hands and make dirt, not waste!
When food scraps go to a landfill, they create methane, which is a greenhouse gas with much
more powerful warming capabilities than carbon dioxide. Even landfills that attempt to capture
this gas only capture a small fraction of the methane released by the slowly anaerobically
decomposing food scraps. There are also harmful effects when food scraps and paper products are
burned in incinerators, which is a common practice in the metro area. Even the most
technologically advanced incinerators release toxic and carcinogenic substances into the
atmosphere that end up in our air and water supplies. Incinerators are the least efficient way to
create energy-less efficient than natural gas, coal, or oil-burning power plants.
The biggest loss, though, is the lost opportunity to make much needed nutrient-rich soil made by
the natural decomposition of food scraps and nonrecyclable paper. Wasting food scraps and
nonrecyclable paper by sending them to landfills or incinerators-not recognizing them as the
resource they are-is not a sustainable or zero-waste strategy.
A better option for saving this compostable material is to collect it and bring it to a conunercial
composting facility where it can be tumed into soil. However, much of this material does not
need to be taken away from home to be composted. Rather than trucking compostable materials
to a facility, backyard composting is the most beneficial way to handle food scraps and some
nonrecyclable paper at home-short of preventing their existence. This not only saves all of the
fuel energy and expense of creating the infrastructure to move and process this material, it also
keeps the benefits right in one's yard. Landscaping and gardens reap the benefits of all this new
nutrient-rich soil.
With the use of the Zero- W <iste Hotline, Eureka Recycling staff are able to convey this message
to residents about the benefits and ease of composting right in their own backyard. Eureka
2
Recycling hotline staff had over 220 conversations this year with metro area residents about
backyard composting!
What's Left? Rethinking and Redesigning
We already
recycle a lot,
so what's left?
When all of the recyclable materials that are still in our
trash are recycled (over half of what the state of Minnesota
still sends to landfills or incinerators is recyclable within
current recycling markets) and the compostable materials
are composted (about another quarter of what we are
wasting), about 22% of our trash still remains, which must
be redesigned so it can be eliminated, reused, recycled, or
composted.
We need Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) to get
all the way to zero. EPR is an approach that shifts
responsibility for the recycling, composting, or safe
disposal of products and packaging from consumers and
governments to those who design, market, and profit from
them: the producers. This shift makes it possible to
completely empty our trash can of the "toughest" trash.
The most efficient place to reduce waste and encourage
reuse, reduction, recycling, and composting is at the
product development stage. This is the most economical place to minimize the environmental
impact of the product-truly sustainable in all regards.
City, county, and state governments can work with manufacturers, businesses, and consumers to
redesign products that fit a zero-waste system. In addition, policies can be created to promote the
creation of products that consumers want while not creating waste and toxins that consumers and
governments don't want.
What is recycling's role in zero waste?
Recycling is a crucial part of getting to zero waste; it is often the first introduction to the idea that
there does not have to be waste. Maplewood's recycling tonnage of over 2,600 tons saves as much
energy as it would take to power 381 households and saves the equivalent carbon emissions of
taking over 1,200 cars off the road for a year! This is an immense energy and carbon savings.
Recycling that is done with a goal of zero waste in mind is a process that focuses on making sure
materials are recycled to their highest and best use-like recycling glass bottles back into glass
bottles, and making high quality paper out of high quality paper. Recycling helps save energy,
conserves many resources, improves air and water quality, and builds community.
Eureka Recycling's Zero-Waste Hotline provides an opportunity to convey these benefits. In
2010, E\lreka Recycling staff had 521 conversations with Maplewood residents to communicate
these benefits of recycling, but also to take them to the next level. We know from experience that
what would save the most energy and resources is not having that single-serve plastic bottle or
3
that cereal box in the first place. Recycling provides the gateway for people to experience zero
waste.
The sustainability of zero waste
Recycling and composting are good waste management strategies, but they are much more than
that. Capturing resources to be made back into new products is sustainable and a zero-waste
strategy. Recognizing that not even mining the resources in the first place is the most sustainable,
both economically and environmentally. Keeping these ways to conserve resources and save
energy-even when they are not always measureable-is the most sustainable option, but must be
looked at in the bigger picture---often found in a sustainability plan or through a city's goals.
Monda 514.46 470.01 447.29 421.93 531.89
Tuesda 299.25 297.7 272.98 256.71 317.68
Wednesda 517.07 493.87 469.92 436.80 506.20
Thursda 397.29 376.08 368.33 337.Q1 390.21
Frida 577.87 562.73 481.43 477.74 551.46
Curbside Total 2,305.94 2,200.39 2,039.95 1,930.19 2,297.44
Multifamil Total 308.32 489.1 628.11 596.33 316.63
Maplewood
Total 2,614.26 2689.49 2,668.06 2,526.52 2,614.07
In 2010, Maplewood recycled over 2,600 tons of material that were made into new products that
possibly have even been recycled again! This amount of material has a great quantity of energy
and a host of natural resources already put into its production. Thus recycling this material. is a
great demonstration of zero waste.
There was a change in the number of curbside versus multifamily tons this year. The change does
not reflect a decrease in the number of actual tons of multifamily material. The change has to do
with a change in late 2009 in the method used to collect and track multifamily material. Prior to
2010, Multifamily and curbside tons were collected on the same truck and a mathematical model
was used to estimate the ratio of multifamily tons in the truck to curbside tons. This method is
less accurate than using a separate truck to collect all multifamily properties. In 2010 we changed
to this more actuate method. In previous years, the total tons were accurate because they were
based on actual truck weights; it was only the ratio of multifamily and curbside that was estimated
until 2010.
The Environmental Benefits of Maplewood's Recycling Program in 2010
There are many ways to calculate the benefits of recycling. To better explain these benefits in
commonly understood terms, government agencies, research scientists, and economists have
created several "calculators" to translate the amounts of recycled materials collected and processed
into equivalent positive societal and environmental benefits.
4
Most recently, it has become imperative to measure waste reduction (and all our activities) in
terms of its impact on climate change. This allows us to speak in a common language, understand
the impact of our choices, and help us prioritize the personal and policy actions that we take.
Many cities around the country work with the International Council for Local Environmental
Initiatives (ICLEI) to quantify and now register the" climate change impacts of their city. It is also
important to calculate the carbon impact of waste reduction as the global effort continues to enact .
a catbon "cap and trade" system.
In addition to climate change mitigation, there are other environmental benefits to recycling,
including saving energy and protecting air quality, water quality, natural resources, natural beauty,
habitat, and human health. Some of these human health benefits are quantified in the Jeffrey
Morris Calculator below.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) WARM Calculator
The equations used in environmental calculations try to take into account the "full life cycle" of
each material-everything from off-setting the demand for more virgin materials (tree harvesting,
mining, etc.) to preventing the pollution that would have occurred if that material were disposed
of (burned or buried). Different calculators may include some or all of the many factors that
contribute to the "full life cycle," so results from calculator to calculator will vary.
While there are many models emerging to calculate greenhouse gas reductions, the most
recognized and standard model is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Waste Reduction
Model (WARM). WARM was desigued to help solid waste planners and organizations track and
voluntarily report greenhouse gas emissions reductions from several different waste management
practices. WARM, last updated in August 2010, recognizes 40 material types.
Maplewood
2006 2,614.26 tons
2007 2,689.49 tons
2008 2,668.49 tons
2009 2,526.52 tons
2010 2,614.07 tons
What do all these numbers mean?
The numbers above help municipalities calculate and track their environmental footprint. For
more information about the process of measuring the environmental benefits of waste reduction,
visit: http://epa.\?,ov / climatechange/wvcd/waste/rneasureghg.html#click.
5
These numbers, however, don't make much sense to the average person. To help recyclers
understand the significance of their actions, the EP A has also developed tools to translate these
numbers into equivalent examples that people can more easily understand.
. For example, using the figures above, the EP A estimates that Maplewood would have had
to remove a total ofl,215 carstrom the road for one yearto have had the same
envirorunental impact in 2010 as they did recycling. To achieve this, approximately 8% of
Maplewood's households would have had to give up one car for a year.
. Another example of how these efforts can be translated into energy savings can be found
in the EP A calculator. It shows that the energy saviilg gained by the recycling efforts of
Maplewood's residents in 2010 could power 389 homes for one year!
Although WARM is the most widely peer-reviewed and accepted model, it is considered to have
several flaws. Many believe the use of this calculator is conservative and understates the real
impact of waste reduction efforts. However, despite these flaws, WARM is a well-recognized,
published calculator. Until a better calculator is peer reviewed and accepted, WARM gives us a
conservative starting place to measure these impacts and work towards our goals. Even with
WARM, as you will see, the impacts are quite significant.
(http://epa.gov/climatechangelvl'vcdJwaste/calculators/W ann F01TI1.html)
Jeffrey Morris Calculator
Jeffrey Morris, Ph.D., Economist at Sound Resource Management in Seattle, has developed a
calculator that begins with the EPA's calculator and expounds upon it to gather information on
not just carbon and CO, but also several other important envirorunental and human health
indicators. Although new and not yet widely used, this calculator shows the significant benefits
that WARM does not consider.
Carbon Dioxide 7,135.9 7,329 7,291.5 6,791.0 6,768.3
Equivalent Reduction metric tons metric tons metric tons metric tons metric
(MTC02E tons
Human Health - 3,552.4 3,323.7 3,688.5
Non-Carcinogen 3,626 tons 3,702 tons
Toxins Reduction tons tons tons
Human Health -
Acidification (502) 21.2 tons 21.0 tons 20.9 tons 19.0 tons 20.7 tons
Reduction
Human Health- 3.8 3.9 3.1 3.2 4.2
Particulates Reduction metric tons metric tons metric tons metric tons metric
tons
Human Health - 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.6
Carcinogens metric tons metric tons metric tons metric tons metric
Reduction tons
For more information about the process of measuring the environmental benefits of waste reduction, visit
httD;! / en;LUOV i dim~tech:mlleJwvcd/waste!measmeQh".htl11.1#click
6
Reyenue Share
Not only does recycling result in huge environmental benefits that help conserve resources, save
energy, and protect air and water, but recyclable materials are valuable products that continue to
have a demand in the marketplace. A recycling program that includes revenue share recognizes
the financial sustainability of the program-both environmentally and economically. Revenue
share reflects the markets for materials and can show the current conditions of the markets. A
program that has revenue share recoguizes the value of these materials and how that value can be
used to support recycling and waste reduction initiatives.
When Maplewood entered into a recycling service contract with Eureka Recycling in 2006, the
city began receiving revenue share from the sale of the materials collected in their recycling
program. Since 2006, Maplewood has received $319,461.12 in revenue from recycling to
continue to invest in the city's recycling progranl or other environnlental programs.
1st Quarter $14,647.95 $19,115.55 $22,551.57 -$3,664 .36 $12,858.40
2nd Quarter $16,323.23 $20,175.79 $27,164.93 -$530.11 $15,312.83
3rd Quarter $15,330.31 $22,836.87 $35,463.07 $6,691.34 $13,498.91
4th Quarter $12,451.14 $25,175.76 $12,909.53 $11,997.04 $19,151.37
Total $58,752.63 $87,303.97 $98,089.10 $14,493.91 $60,821.51
Eureka Recycling continues to share the city's belief that the revenue received from the sale of
the material collected in Maplewood should be shared back with the city. With the normalization
of the recycling markets, the recycling program reflects an economically viable program. This
resulted in about $4.00 per household (single-family homes and multifamily units) shared back
with the city to invest in the recycling program or other waste reduction initiatives.
The two-sort system consistently results in quality materials that are in high demand in the
markets. Keeping paper and cardboard separate from bottles and cans helps keep the glass and
plastic from getting into the paper, which increases the quality of the paper, and results in a higher
value for the materials. This ensures that what residents put out to recycle is actually getting
recycled to its highest value, resulting in less resources and energy used to make products out of
virgin materials. Recycling the high quality paper that comes from Maplewood residents back
into high quality paper allows that paper to be recycled more times than if it was recycled into
lower quality paper. Making newspaper back into newspaper is much better for the environment,
but also leads to higher revenue back to the city.
Annual Composition Study
Eureka Recycling and Maplewood both share a value that there should be a composition analysis
done each year for just the material collected in the City of Maplewood and not a larger facility
average for all the materials processed in an entire MRF. This infoffilation on the specific
7
composition of the material being collected in the City of Maplewood is an essential element that
helps the city better manage the recycling program. City-specific composition is also important to
help develop sustainability goals around recycling and waste reduction because the material is
specific to Maplewood and echoes the education and effort put into the program by the city.
Many cities receive composition infonnation from their recycling provider that is an amalgam of
all of the tons being processed in their facility from all sources: residential, commercial, and
industrial. Each city is different, so if a change in the composition of materials occurs because of a
specific education initiative undertaken by the city or because of some change in the purchasing
and recycling habits of the residents this information will not be seen in a composition report that
is not city-specific in its scope.
In this year's composition analysis, conducted in March 2010, Eureka Recycling collected 96,965
pouuds of material from routes in each day of collection in the city. This material was run
through Eureka Recycling's sorting facility separate from all other materials to breakdown
Maplewood's recycling into different types (see chart below).
News Mix 61.52% 62.87% 52.91%
Cardboard 6.45% 5.44% 7.41%
Boxboard 2.28% 3.63% 5.95%
Wet Strength 0.35% 0.36% 1.99%
Phone Books 1.28% 0.06% 0.03%
T etraPak N egli 'ble Ne li "ble 0.03%
Textiles 0.39% 0.09% 0.07%
Residual 0.23% 0.16% 0.13%
TOTAL 72.50% 72.60% 68.52%
Total Glass 16.09% 15.08% 14.90% 17.38% 18.18%
Steel Cans 3.07% 2.66% 3.10% 2.86% 2.84%
Aluminum 1.80% 1.46% 1.40% 1.44% 1. 60%
Total Plastics 5.71% 4.79% 6.10% 5.4% 8.46%
Residual 0.84% 0.38% 1.50% 0.3% 0.40%
TOTAL 27.50% 24.37% 26.90% 27.40% 31.48%
Total Residual 1. 07% 0.41% 1.9% 0.46% 0.53%
For more information on the methodology of the composition analysis done by Eureka Recycling please see Appendix B
8
In 2010, the City of Maple wood had a notable 0.53% residual rate, meaning only 0.53 ofa
percent of all the total materials collected in Maplewood were not recycled into their highest and
best use. This is an increase of 0.07% from last year's percentage. Maplewood's residual rate
remains one of the lowest residual rates in the state of Minnesota. This residual rate remains vety
low because of the education and commitment to quality that the City of Maplewood values and
provides to their residents. This is truly astounding and something to be very proud of!
With the turnaround of the recycling markets, the composition trend was anticipated to continue:
the percentage of paper would continue to fall and percentage of containers would continue to
rise. The City of Maplewood follows this trend as do most of the other cities with which Eureka
Recycling partners. We recognize that there is not as much newsprint at the curb, but the
newsprint that is being marketed is very valuable so promoting all materials to be recycled remains
crucial. Many of the end markets continue to demand recycled content, recognizing the
enormous energy-saving benefits from using recycled materials over having to cut down more
trees or make more glass from silica and other raw materials.
For the first year since it has been collected, the amount of Tetra-Pak (milk cartons and juice
boxes) has been measurable. This is exciting because it means that the education about this
relatively new material has been absorbed and residents are recycling it at a measurable rate!
The composition of phone books is notable this year: the percentage dropped by 50%. This year
saw more widespread education around recycling phone books, but also the opportunity to "opt
out" of phone books being delivered. There is exciting potential that more people opted out
from receiving phone books than in previous years. Opting out of phone book distribution is
much more environmentally beneficial than creating the phone books and having them delivered
to homes where they often go directly into the recycling bin because of the wide use of
information on the internet. While "opt out" programs are a good step, a policy to "opt in" to
receive only the phone books that one wants is even better step toward zero waste. An "opt in"
program is preferable because it does not require action from the resident unless they want a
phone book. It does not require individuals to know and contact each publishing company
separately. It would greatly reduce the unnecessary use of resources and energy for people who
are not even going to use the phone book. Together we can help support the "opt out" initiative,
but promote the policy to require an "opt in" program as a sustainable, zero-waste strategy.
Annual Participation and Set-Out Rate Studies
Maplewood is one of the few cities in the metropolitan area in which actual participation
information is gathered that is city-specific. Each year Eureka Recycling counts set-out rates in
each collection day for four straight weeks. This study yields information on how many residents
set-out material in any given week as well as on the total percentage of the residents that take part
in the program.
This information gives city and Eureka Recycling staff the ability to target recycling education
efforts and messages to the specific areas that need it the most. This not only saves in the cost of .
sending unnecessary mailings, it provides the opportunity to examine the specific areas that need
improv~ment and find ways to reduce the bartiers to participation on a more personal level.
9
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Set Out Rate 43% 41% 47% 45% 43%
Participation Rate 69% 67% 72% 70% 66%
Eureka Recycling conducted the annual participation and set-Qut rate study from October 5 to November 3, 2009.
and from October 4 to October 29, 2010. (See Appendix C for the definitions and methodologies of the
participation and set-Qut rate studies.)
While 2010 saw another drop in participation, Maplewood has maintained a high participation
rate, which can be attributed to the consistent and high quality education and information that
the City provides to its residents. This information both informs them of new materials like milk
cartons, juice boxes, and wet strength packaging, but also inspires them with information about
the economic and environmental benefits of recycling. This information gives the residents the
tools they need to participate and the motivation to take the steps in their own households to help
reduce waste. In the future, Maplewood will need to make sure that consistent and frequent
education still takes place in the coming years to maintain a high participation rate.
Multifamily Building Recycling
The multifamily recycling program in Maplewood continues to grow. This year the number of
multifnnily units with access to Maplewood's recycling program increased by 16.78%.
Maplewood continues to playa role in the metropolitan area as a leader in establishing successful
recycling programs for its residents.
Conclusion
As Maplewood enters a new contract for recycling, it is of utter importance to keep up the energy
and participation in the recycling program to keep increasing the waste reduction efforts.
Harnessing these current recyclers and introducing them to ideas like the Twin Cities Free
Market and backyard composting is possible and necessary to ensure continued energy for
reducing waste. Keeping the residents involved maintains the ownership in the community
around waste reduction efforts so that Maplewood can carry on toward a plan for sustainability.
10
City of Maplewood
Outreach and Education Summary 2010
In 2010, Eureka Recycling and the City of Maplewood together expanded outreach efforts to
several city events to educate about waste reduction including reuse, recycling, and backyard
composting. We partnered to bring education to the Taste of Maple wood for the first time and
National Night Out for the third year. Multi.tamily outreach was great and 16% more multifamily
units participated in the city's recycling program.
Maplewood saw a slight decrease in the overall recycling participation rate again this year, making
it very apparent the constant need for waste reduction outreach. This was the last year of the
contract with Eureka Recycling, so the City will have to continue these educational initiatives to
keep residents educated about how to reduce their waste. In 2010, we continued to educate
residents about the curbside recycling program and the benefits of reducing waste; recognizing
that there is more to waste reduction than recycling.
Zero-Waste Hotline
In 2010, Eureka Recycling's hotline staff had 477 conversations with Maplewood residents about
the curbside recycling program. Eureka Recycling staff educated new recyclers about the
program, explained how to get bins, made sure their recycling was collected, and informed
residents about the environmental and economic benefits of waste reduction. Hotline staff also
answered 44 calls from building contacts and residents participating in the multifamily recycling
program that were calling with standard service questions. Eureka Recycling worked with these
callers to help them manage their multifamily recycling set-ups, add carts or pick-ups, provide
them with education material for their residents, and to work in many other ways to help
improve their service.
Hotline Calls
Curbside Calls 800 327 587 469 477
Multifamil Calls 56 50 40 32 44
Total Calls 856 422 627 501 521
Requests for
Printed Materials
Curbside 125 81 100 128 107
We saw an increase in calls this year mostly in July due to the confusion around the.lndependence
Day holiday. In 2010, we did not delay collection since the holiday was on a Sunday; however,
many residents expected that we would have because many places (banks, offices, etc.) were
closed onJuly 5, so they did not put their recycling out until a day later. The City of Maple wood
may want to keep this in mind considering a similar situation will occur with Christmas 2011 and
New Year's Day 2012.
I
Requests for Printed Education Materials
Throughout the year, Eureka Recycling mailed specific curbside recycling schedules, sorting
information, and clothes and linens stickers to 107 Maplewood residents in respouse to their
questions and calls.
Curbside
Guide to Recycling
All Maplewood residents in the curbside recycling program received the 2010
Guide to Recycling through direct mail. In addition to the basic instructious for
how recycling should be set out aud the materials collected, the 2010 Guide
reflected the community and the impact of individual efforts on waste reduction.
We focused our message on three areas: recycling, composting and producer
responsibility--actions that bring us closer to zero waste.
Direct Education
Eureka Recycling and the City of Maplewood share a value that all the material that can be
recycled should be and that material that cannot be recycled should not be collected. Taking
nomecyclable items on a ride in a recycling truck and through a processing facility not ouly
wastes the fuel and energy to transport and process the material, but it also leaves the residents
with the mistaken impression that the material can be recycled when in fact it cannot.
ThsOtYflffillidest!'MW
ll;JidYOl!frt;1cydingi
Eureka Recycling drivers educate residents at the curb using educational tags for specific
problems. In 2010, drivers left approximately 15,699 educational tags in recycler's bins.
Driver T a
Postcards
Personalized
Letters
12
o
10
5
9
Recyclers are often confused about what can and cannot be recycled at the curb. Our experience
has shown us that the absolute best place to educate residents about their recycling program is
right at the curb. Eureka Recycling works closely with the curbside drivers to ensure that they
2
understand the important role that education plays in not only ensuring high quality materials at
the curb but also for helping residents truly understand why some items are left behind.
As a result, Eureka Recycling drivers leave a tag at every house that needs further education and
track their efforts so the data can be reported to the City of St. Louis Park and Eureka Recycling.
This is efficient because drivers can educate only the residents that are confused, and it also begins
a conversation with the residents. All of Eureka Recycling's tags encourage residents to call our
hodine where zero-waste educators are waiting to clear up confusion about which items are not
recyclable or to explain how residents' efforts at the curb have an important impact on the value
of the material and the environmental benefits of recycling.
Postcards and Letters
There are instances where our drivers ate not able to
conununicate to residents with educational tags. In these
circumstances, the resident may be confused about proper
recycling practices and do not have recycling bins provided by the
city (or decided not to use them). Our alternative form of
conununication is educational postcards, which provide the same
Ot similar information as the educational tags. We believe that all
residents should have access to correct recycling information, and postcards allow for residents
without bins to learu about Eureka Recycling's recycling program.
Drivers and hotline staff worked together to send out 93 educational postcards in 2010. This is a
significant decrease in the number of postcards sent, indicating people understand the recycling
program better. This may also be due to more residents having recycling bins as a result of the
push to distribute bins through the Public Works office as well as through outreach efforts, such
as National Night Out and Taste of Maple wood.
Sometimes placing an educational tag in a resident's bin is not the best way to get in touch with
them. Personalized letters are another form of conununication about programs and services
Eureka Recycling provides. There are three types of personalized letters sent to residents:
1. Chronic problem letters provide detailed information and instructions about setting out
recycling. These letters are used when the usual tags and postcards have not been
successful in correcting repeated problems. Drivers keep a daily record of the addresses
that have received tags but still need further education. Addresses that have received tags
for three consecutive weeks with no change in how they are recycling receive a
personalized letter that encourages the resident to contact us so we can have a more in-
depth conversation.
2. Letters to update service information for Special Pickup Instruction (SPI) customers.
These letters are sent when SPI residents have changed the location of their recycling, or if
it appears the resident has moved out of the home and no longer needs the service.
3. Letters to address service issues that are filed by residents or issues that are reported by
drivers. These letters help residents better understand the program and are a more personal
way to have detailed conversations with them about issues that may be confusing.
In 2010, Eureka Recycling sent 9 personalized letters to residents; 8 were chronic problem letters
and one was the third type of personalized letter.
3
As in previous years, the most common issues for residents that required direct education were
confusion about plastics (what types of plastic are recyclable) and proper sorting.
Special Pickup Instruction Addresses
To ensure that every resident has the opportunity to recycle, Eureka Recycling offers to collect
recycling from locations other than the curb for residents who request special pickup service due
to short- or long-term physicallirnitations. This service is provided free of charge. At the end of
2010, this service was extended to 18 Maplewood residents. We worked with the City of
Maplewood, residents on the Special Pickup list, and Tennis Sanitation to smoothly transfer this
servIce.
Multifamily
The City of Maplewood has a very organized multifamily recycling program. This year 11 new
accounts were brought on to the city program, resulting in a 16.78% increase in the number of
multifamily units with access to Maplewood's recycling
program. The 11 accounts' old service contracts with
other providers had expired and are now part of
Maplewood's recycling program. Each building was
visited by Eureka Recycling staff to determine the
proper setup and distribute educational materials to help
the management ensure participation in the program.
There are now a total of 47 multifamily complexes, 167
residential buildings, and 7 city buildings, for a total ofJ,987 units being serviced in Maplewood's
multifamily program.
.'
~-,.,,~.,
~ ~~/,'""
4,?iI.-...~,
~6-'--/-"'--_/~~--t,t)=~~~,r,
~-==~E~~=,~~--,;=--=-- ,\~';."
~ i.I' ~ID.J'.WJr.rmrm/.~"I5.m' j~' ':,.
-': '---_'--::-"'~T.____..-=-- _
\;; I~~ ~" 1~11l1BT __f-
Multifamily Education Materials and Customer Service
From 2009 to 2010, the number of units recycling in Maplewood's multifamily program
increased by 16.78 %. Eureka Recycling continued to monitor the performance at each account
on an ongoing basis in order to improve participation. Our drivers tracked issues and staff were
able to follow up immediately by offering suggestions that addressed the specific needs of the
building and by providing more educational materials for residents. Eureka Recycling provided
263 pieces of recycling education (instructional posters and brochures) to the building
management and residents of the newly established and existing multifamily accounts in 2010.
In 2011 and beyond, the City of Maplewood will need to serve an integral part in ensuring
property managers and tenants have the tools needed to continue a successful multifamily
recycling program. This includes continuing to monitor the performance and service issues at
each account in order to adjust service levels on an ongoing basis. Capacity for storage is an issue
that will have to be addressed through the drivers and involved on-site contacts so that more carts
are added as residents recycle more. In 2010, 62 carts were added to buildings where increased
recycling capacity was necessary to service the increased recycling needs of the residents.
Special Education and Outreach
Compost workshop at the Maplewood ReUse Center
Together the City of Maplewood and Eureka Recycling recognize that recycling alone will not
empty the garbage can. Backyard composting is an easy way to help reduce waste at home by
4
turning food scraps, leaves and grass, and some nonrecyclable paper into dirt right at home. Not
having to truck the compostable materials somewhere is the best, most environmentally beneficial
way to handle it. Teaching residents how to reduce their waste and impact on the environment
by removing some of the materials that create methane in a landfill or create toxins and
greenhouse gases when burned in an incinerator helps build community around reducing waste
and conserving our resources!
OnJuly 17, 2010, Eureka Recycling staffpartnered with the ReUse Center in Maplewood and
taught the first backyard compost workshop at the ReUse Center this past summer. Twelve
people attended the workshop, but attendance probably would have been higher if there was not
a severe storm approaching. Our compost workshops are based on helping residents get to zero
waste at home, and are designed to prepare people with enough information to confidently start
composting in their own backyards. Residents are encouraged to compost in a way that works for
them and they are offered plenty of time to ask questions.
National Night Out
The City of Maplewood and Eureka Recycling recognized the opportunity to connect with
Maplewood residents on a night where the community gathers. The city and Eureka Recycling
thought it best to bring resources to residents as well as take the time to build community and
answer any questions residents had. Eureka Recycling staff joined city staff and Environment and
Natural Resource Commission members in reaching out to residents to educate about recycling
and composting in Maplewood by attending National Night Out neighborhood parties on August
3. The mission was to talk with residents at area block parties, answer any questions they had
about recycling, talk to them about the environmental and economic benefits of recycling, and'
distribute recycling bins to anyone that didn't have one or who needed an extra to help them
recycle more. Together we reached 26 parties and distributed 310 recycling bins. We have found
that distribution of recycling bins greatly increases participation when residents have plenty of
room to recycle more materials.
We enjoyed talking to residents about everything from the complications of recycling plastic to
the ease of the next step to zero waste at home: composting. We distributed 2010 Guides to
Recycling and brochures with information about the Twin Cities Free Market to anyone
interested. There were many people interested in the opportunity to give and get free stuff
through the Twin Cities Free Market!
Taste of Maplewood
Eureka Recycling took part in the citywide festival of Taste of Maple wood on August 6 and 7,
partnering with the Green Institute and the Maplewood ReUse Center on a display about reuse.
Eureka Recycling highlighted the treasures one can find on the Twin Cities Free Market-an
online resource available to Maplewood residents to give and get free stuff. The Twin Cities Free
Market is a place where residents can list reusable items-as well as get free stuff to benefit the
environment, save money, and make someone's day!
Eureka Recycling also displayed information about the recycling program in Maplewood and had
conversations with residents about how we can get to zero waste. The Green Institute highlighted
the remarkable reusable building materials at the Maplewood ReUse Center. Together we
engaged residents to think about reusing rather than sending something to the landfill or
incinerator and to dialogue about zero waste.
5
Aff~(\ <k;, Ii
0
....
0
N
>-
t::
Ql
c..
e
D.;
>-
.Q
Ql
Cl
C'G
s::
s::
0
I-
~
E
C'G
LL
I
E
::l
:E
"C
<C 0
.~ 0
"'C :=
l!: Ql
Q) c..
c. C'G
c.
<C :E
-.t l/) -.t .... .... 00 ... :: -.t -.t -.t ... ... N .... 00 l/) G> G> -.t C> N CD 00 C>
.... ... C> CD ... C> N G> ... C> CD ... ... 00 l/) .... .... ... -.t N ... 00 l/) l/)
N CD N -.t -.t N C> .... C> ... ... l/) ... C> -.t CD 00 N N .... -.t G> N ... ...
<D N ,.: .0 <D ..; ...; 0 ...; a; ,.: ...; N N as ...; ..; <D .0 ,.: .0 as ...;
... ... l/) ... N N N N ... ... ... ...
, '" , CO '" '" '" '" N , N ... N -.t 0 '" ... 0 '" '" 0 '" CO , CO
N '" -.t -.t '" CO 0 0 CO '" CO CO '" CO CO '" '" CO '" N ....
-.t_ CO '" CO 0 '" N_ ....- CO -.t_ "!. N ....- CO N_ O_ CO CO N CO '"
CO C"i N ci ".; C"i ... CO .... CO .... ..; ... ,.: ... .... ci ..; ".; N oci
... '" ... ... N ... N '" '" '" -.t ... ... N ... N ... ... N
...
, ... , .... CO -.t N .... ... , -.t ... ... ... .... ' I!: '" '" ... '" CO '" , '"
N ... ... -.t CO '" '" -.t N '" N ... -.t ... .... ... '" CO ... -.t
'" .... CO '" -.t_ ....- '" CO ... CO .... '" '" '" "'. .... co_ "'. "'. "!.
,.: ".; ".; -.t '" 0 N ai ..; ..; ai '" CO ".; ... ci CO .... -.t N
... '" ... ... '" CO '" '" CO '" -.t ... ... '" ... '" ... ... '"
.
, ... , 0 -.t '" '" , '" ' i<r '" '" '" '" , .... 0 CO N .... N ... , '"
0 '" '" '" '" -.t CO '" CO '" N -.t CO '" '" CO ... '" CO
'" 0 "!. '" '" '" .... ....- 0 .... CO -.t ... '" 0_ '" -.t_ CO ...
-.t CO C") ... ..; C"i ,.: CO CO .... cD cD ci N '" CO '" '" ai
... C") ... '" '" '" '" '<t -.t ... ... N '" ... ...
, '" , ... , CO '" , 0 , ... -.t , , CO , N '" , , '" ... '" , ,
CO '" 0 '" CO .... C") 0 CO N '" CO N
CO_ -.t '" ... '" "'- C") '" ... "'- '" '" ...
CO ".; ..; ..; ".; CO C") ..; ci -.t ..; C"i ai
... '" N N N ... '<t ...
.... N 0 0 .... 0 CO 0 '" 0 -.t '" CO CO '" '" .... '" CO CO N CO .... CO 0
... -.t CO N CO 0 CO .... -.t .... N '" '" N ... '" 0 0 ... CO '" '" CO 0
... N ... Nt ... ... ... ...
... 0
N
'" '" 0 0 CO '"
'" .... -.t N N '"
0 '" CO 0 -.t 1if N ... '" CO
CO CO '" '" ...
-.t 0 '" 0 1if <II ... 0 , ...
CO ... ... ..c: 0 '" ..c:
0 0 CO N W '" 1:: 0
... N 0 1:: '" CO '" 1if 0 ...r
CO N ... '" '" CO 0 .... '" <II ... '" N CO 0 en
N ...r ... ...r ... Z N ...r '" '" W N 0 0> CO <II ... Z CO -.t <II
0> ai' cti '" 0 ... en CO -.t CO ::> W ... '" W
-.t 0> cti <II 0> ... cti
... ~ ::> ... 0 0> cti 0> ,;. -.t -.t ...r ... " 0> cti CO
~ W ::> ~ ...r (;) (;)
ii5 " ... ~ ::> ::> <II ::> N N 0> ...r ::> > ...
cti ii5 0> ai' '" - " " ~ ~ 0> " 0> 0> 0> -0 " .<:: ::>
::> ~ (/) 0> ~ ::> cti cti 0> ~ 0> 0> 0> (;) " 't:l 't:l
>- ~ ai' ~ ii5 ~ <II 0> <II
" '0. 't:l ~ > " " " ~ ~ ii5 > <II
0> E ii5 0 <l: ~I~ 0> <II <II - ::> o<l: 't:l ~ 0 0
~ 0> C. 0> ~ ~ 0> > ..J ..J " 0> (/) 0> 0::: 0 0::: 0:::
'00 en ~ "" - en " ~
" rn 0> - Uico<X:: <II ..c: en ~ :c ~
(/) 'n; " .0:: >- " ~ 0>
0> en 't:l 't:l Qi ::> <II ;;: <II '5 ~ (;) .!!1 0> 0>
1i5 ::2: "(i5 " <II ~ 2: - 't:l c;, C. " " ~ 0> <II .c "
e en ~ ~ N " ~ft~ " " " ~ ~ ::> "" en 0> ::>
" :E 0> ~ <II 0> 0> 0 0 3< <II " <II ::> 0 <II 0> 0> 0
LL ::2: LL <l: <l: I CJ (..J ..J ..J (/) > W ..J LL (..J ..J ::2: III (..J
'C
0
~ en
-
"
a. 0>
<II '" E en 't:l
::2: 'E -
- 1:: " en en 0 en en
0> - rn 0> i~ 0> - 0 ~ 0> -
en "
0> 0> en - E . E " - 't:l E 0>
~ ~ 0 en " <l: 0> " " 0>
- - 1:: 1:: en 0 E
0> (/)- 't:l " 0> en <II E 0> 0 a. " ..c: en
::> (/) " 0> E en <II 1:: 't:l C. 1:: E (..J <II 0 " 0> 1::
>- .- 0 E 0> c. ::> " E <II
" E c. (..J 1:: Cl <l: 0 en <II <l: <II 1:: 0> ::2: E ;;: C.
0> C. 1:: <II ,gJ <II (..J E :E c. <II ~ E 0 0 <l:
~ 0> "" C. 0> .!!2 - 0> ~ <l: c. <II - I
" '00 <II " fj Cl ~ - - Cl 0 ::> <II I-
0> C. <l: '0 .~ 0> <l: " " ~ <l: 0 0>
0> en 0> <l: (..J 't:l " ~ ~ I '" <II <II tT 't:l (..J - 't:l Cl
1i5 ::2: '00 U " [L ii:: I- 0 .!!! <II <II 1[ ::2: ii5 ,gJ (/) <II 0 " 't:l
e " .!!1 't:l 0> 0> 1i5 " <II 0> ~ " 0 12
rn 't:l E E 0> :.:: [L
LL ::2:::2: ~ 0 13 ~ ~ ~ 0> ~ 0 en ..c: " Cl Cl 1i5
0> j " - ::> ::> :0 0 0> 0> 1:: '" .!!1 0> " .l9 0> 'S; 0> 0> 0>
co oco iii ..c: '5 0> - - " " " 0> E c;, 't:l 0> E 0> a. a. a.
N co-.t .g ~ ~ " " .c " " " Cl 0> .<:: ""
-.t coo 0> Qi <II <II 0> 0> 0 0 0 0 't:l E " "0 C5 0> 0 <II <II <II <II
... ...N III III III (..J (..J (..J (..J (..J (..J (..J(..J w w w CJ I I ..J ::2: ::2: ::2:
'"
-
o
""'
N co ... co ... Cl> Ul Cl> N ~ ~ 0 Cl> Cl> N ... ... Cl> Cl> ... Cl> N ...
~ Ul 0 N N CO ~ II) ~ II) N Cl> "f' 0 II) Cl> N CO CO II) ... 0 "f'
Cl> Ul "'!. "f' "!. Cl> ... ... 0 N Cl> ... CO CO "f' CO Ul N ~ N CO 0 ...
<D N ~ N ~ a) <D ,..: M ...; ...; 00 N ,..: Q Q a) <D M <D N a)
... "f' ~ N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ Cl>
II)
0> , , N "f' "f' co ~ 0 CO CO ~ , , I!) 0') , 0> N "f' , , ...
N ~ CO 0') N 0> ... 0> CO 0') N CO ... 0 ~ ~
0') CO 0> 0') "f'. O. 0 "f' "l CO 0 0> N ... "t CO
oi M M .,.; ~ N oi 00 N ci ci oi oi .,.; ... <D
... "f' ~ ~ N I!) ~ "f' N 0') 0') N ...
~ ~
~
N , , "f' 0> N N ... 0> I!) co co , , co , , N 0> co , , "f'
~ ... 0 N N 0') CO I!) ... 0 N I!) I!) CO ~
0 N ... I!) N CO. 0> O. .... "l 0> N N 0> II)
M M M cO .,.; N ci ~ 0> ... CO 00 ~ M Q
co I!) ~ ~ 0') ... 0') ~ "f' "f' 0') ~
~ "!.
~
N , , , ~ 0> co 0') "f' 0> , N , , 0> , , I!) ~ I!) , , co
"f' 0> co ... 0 0 ... CO 0 CO "f' I!) ...
"t 0_ O. 0') 0_ ~ 0') I!) 0> N ~ ... '"
I!) <0 0 ... ... N <0 CO .,.; ,..: cO M ,..:
<0 ~ ~ 0') I!) N ~ "f' "f' 0') ...
~ Cl>
0 , , , 0> CO N , 0> ... , ... , , ... , , N 0 N , , II)
0') 0> ... ~ 0> CO CO "f' N ~ N II)
I!) 0 0 0> 0 0> CO ~ I!) CO CO Ul
".: .... I!) N ci N cO N M N 00 N
.... 0 ~ N .... ~ .... N N ...
~ II)
0 N CO ... ~ 0 0 ~ N 0 0 I!) 0 CO 0 CO I!) 0 0 I!) ti'i1~1:;;
.... 0') ~ ~ 0') 0> <0 I!) ... CO ... <0 N 0> CO CO .... N <0 ...
N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Cl>
M
0') 0
.... 0 ... N I!)
.... I!) <0 ~ 0') N
N .... ~ 0 ~ I!) 0 0> N 0
- I!) ~ 0') 0') 0
. I!) .s:: CO 1if .co .s:: ~ ...
LUN .... CO 0') N <0
'5 CO N 0 ... ~ III 1il 0> N t:: N ...
Ol.... <0 ... ... 0 ~ 0 LU III 0> 0 ai
::::~ 0 CO 0') I!) ai ... 1if ~ 0
CO CO ai 0> LU ~ Z
(f) N .s:: -- ... I!) :::: -- I!)
c~ ~ t:: ~ I!) > I!) ~ ,.., 0 :::: ~
Olo> "C N "C VI CO <0 ~ ID 1ii I!) c Ol ...
~O') 1if 0 III t N .'" III -- N C N Ol Ol ~
III 1if I!) ~ ii:i
z 0 0 0 LUN Ol "C "C Ol ~ ~
~ 0 ~ :::: N ~ "C -'" III III > - . - OJ
~ 0:: Ol 1ii 0:: 0 ~ Ol- ~ <( (f) ~ "C (f) 'n;
:::: ... ~ ii:i - 0 1if ::::I!) - III III 0 0 <0 C 0 ~ :;::l
<0 - ii:i ~ .s:: 0 c'" (f) 0 a. 0:: 0:: ~ Ol ,.., C 0 VI l- e
0') .s:: 0:: 2 ::::
~ .s:: ii:i Cl VI Ol .s:: OlI!) 0 (;' ~ ~ 1ii ~ ~ ~ ct>
~ .s:: 'n; ~ (f) >~ l .s:: Ol
.f!! ';:: - - - "C "C a. :2
0') c - (f) <(I!) 0 Ol III c c Ol Cl
.... -'" :::: C, (jj ~ C: 1il VI c :::: :::: c .s:: 0 N '0 ,Jg VI
:; ~f8 Cl ~ Cl ~
0') <> c .'" <> Ol Ol III Ol Ol Ol 0 0 :;:; Ol III ~ ct>
N :2 0 LU <( :2 (!) "C LU N 0 ID -' 0 0 (f) LL I I :> 0::
,
VI
'C
Ol e
E ::::
"C 0 0
VI "C 0 I II.
VI - C 0 OJ
Ol c c .!!!
VI Ol ~ III VI ~
VI E VI :c -
Ol VI E III C:- "C 'E - Ol Ol 0
'E 0 E VI - .!!l 0 c Q. 0 I-
VI I Ol . c t:: (jj Ol 0 Ol Ol :2 Cl VI
Ol 0 E VI Ol III C VI 1il ~ E E '" C "C -
E c 'E ~ c c
Ol ~ ..!!1 .s:: 0 E a. Ol 0 '" Ol Ol t:: t:: :2 C:- ~ ~ Ol
t:: 0 C Ol <( E 0:: -
1:: c :c ~ .s:: t:: C C Q. '" III .... - "C E
III E t:: o Ol c a. 0 c (jj
a. III '" 0 0 c '" t:: C '" a. :::: 0 t::
<( (!) :2 :2 I- ~ t:: a. :::: III 0 :20 :2 Ol <( <( 4!1 0 ~ N 4!1 '"
'" <( 0 a. (5 '" a.
"C "C "C "C "C I- a. 0 <( ,Jg VI Ol - ~ Ol I 0 I I <(
0 0 0 0 0 <( Ol ~ c '" "C Cl
- Cl ~ ~ :> :::: .- 0 "C "C C -
0 ~ ~ ~ ~ .s:: III 13 VI 0 ~ c 0 '" Ol
1:: "C Ol 0 ~ c -
~ .2' c 0 Ol '" ~ ~
LU .;; 0 a. .- 0 i: E Ol Ol Ol III
Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol '" .;; '5 "C ,.., ~ Cl
C "C - Ol VI c-'" Cl -'" -
Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. ~ ~ -'" -'" Ol Ol E VI c
~ ~ c VI .~ C III Ol :is .-: ~ ~ ,Jg ~ ~ ~
'" III III III '" <> 0 '" '" 0 0 '" Ol Ol .s:: :::: o '"
:2 :2 :2 :2 :2 :2 z a. a. a. 0:: (f)1D (f) (f) U5 U5 (f) 1-0. :>
'"
....
o
N
lIIltC"')U)NCOOC)t--t-- 0
cn"'l:tNC"')NcoN~ U)
ClC)t--U)~"'I:tcoU)1I) N
~"NO"a;N.nor=M M
... '" '"
CD
M"'I:it__<OO>OOC"') 0
LOO>__"'I:it__LO,....."'I:t U)
"!.."'I:it_("')_~":O>_"'I:itCO U)
__N__"'I:itM__ .n NO.
N__ __ II) en
...
...
"'I:itN,.....__O"'l:t CO
LOO"'l:it<O U) t--
NNO>__ It) 0
Cf'i..nM~Cf'i iii' uj
--__ __ "'I:t II)
"!.
...
0>0>"'I:it0>0~ en
"'I:it0>0"'l:it 0 t--
NMN<O It) ~
Cf'i-.i"Cf'ioi Q as
---- "'I:t......
en
1 ("")0>0<00 CO
<OMLON t--
00000') CO
N 0)- L{) cD C"')"
... '"
--------------......
00> '"
0'" '"
...<0 0
..r::.LOON~NN
t::LO("") --0 ~
OO')CO~~O>Q)
Z~~t::W~~~
~1ifai~QjOJ ~
c:~"'C<(Q)"'C<(
~-co.....bm....
<((J)0 <1l(J)0 <1liii
",Q)()O:: Q).<::O:: Q) Q,
<.- ~ al _ ~.c 'u
.amt::.S:!ffit::Q)'c
~~8~~8~:i
III
'"
'E
'"
Q,
e
D..
iii
:;::;
!:
'"
:5!
III
'"
0::
,
!:
o
Z
05
,!:!
:is
::l
D..
~
Q)
-
C
Q) ~ ~
()2002:!
>- t:: of: t:: 0
:"!:::Q)oQ)1-
0;505:0
:J:E~.2"E
~E.a:o~
._ 0 m :::J_
oozo..<1l
"'C"'C"'C"'C~
00001-
~ ~ ~ ~ .~
~~~~ffi
c.c.c.c.o
m m m m ..c
22220..
'"
'"
II)
vi
C>
CD
III
'C
!:
::l
o
D..
III
iii
'0
I-
iii
:;::;
!:
'"
'C
"w
'"
0::
,
!:
o
Z
05
~
's
III
U.
:;::;
:;
2
o
..;
o
N
~
CIJ
..c
E
CIJ
~
C.
CIJ
Vl.
-
o
~
ltl
~
~
"
CIJ
E
t:
ltl
C.
<(
"t]
~
ltl
OJ)
~
o
Z
o
~
CIJ
E
ltl
"
"t]
CIJ
OJ)
C
ltl
.<::
u
~
~
"
CIJ
E
~
~ ltl
C.
<(
~
o
'c:
CIJ
Vl
t:
::>
o
u
.!!!
ltl
1::
CIJ
(!)
.
'"
-
o
'"
Agenda Report 5.d.
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Steye Kummer, Ciyil Engineer II
Western Hills Area Street Improvement Project - Wetland Impacts
March 11, 2011, for the March 21 ENR Commission Meeting
INTRODUCTION
Engineering staff are currently in the process of preparing plans and specifications for the upcoming
Western Hills Area Street Improvement (City Project 10-14). The area of proposed street
improvement is bounded by Roselawn Avenue to the north, 1-35E to the east, Larpenteur Avenue to
the south, and Rice Street on the west along with the Edgemont-Arkwright-Kingston loop on the east
. side of 1-35E (Attachment 1).
Staff is proposing improvements to the "Jackson Hole" wetland buffer, located on a City-owned
parcel on the northwest corner of the intersection of Jackson Street and Larpenteur Avenue.
Pursuant to the City's Wetland Ordinance at Section 5b(9) (Attachment 2), staff is seeking a
recommendation of approval from the Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission to
conduct public improvements to the Jackson Hole wetland buffer.
DESCRIPTION
Jackson Hole, as it has been named for reference, is a land-locked area located near the northwest
corner of Jackson Street and Larpenteur Avenue. The elevation difference from the intersection to
the bottom of the low area is about 30 feet. The low area receives storm water drainage from 3
points:
A 24-inch concrete pipe off the end of Beaumont Lane (NW corner of the basin) which drains
a portion of the Western Hills neighborhood west of Jackson Street.
A 24-inch corrugated metal pipe off of low point catch basins on Jackson street about 300
feet north of Larpenteur Avenue (NE corner of the basin) which captures overland flow from
the neighborhood.
An 18-inch corrugated metal pipe off of low point catch basins in Larpenteur Avenue about
300 feet west of Jackson Street.
City staff has conducted a number of studies on the basin. First, the Wetland Delination study was
completed on November 11, 2011 by S.E.H. The wetland limits were delineated on October 2011 by
S.E.H. Subsequently, city staff surveyed the flag locations, resulting in the double-dashed wetland
boundary shown on the attached exhibit.
Second, staff has been conducting a hydrologic study and monitoring on the basin to gain a bench
mark for its operation as storm water enters. No-outlet basins are challenging to predict behavior
since draw-down of the basin is dependent on infiltration. It is difficult to gage a constant flow rate
out of the basin since soil types and infiltration rates vary widely throughout the area. Staff has
queried several residents adjacent to the basin to get an idea of its current operation. Based on the
anecdotal stories, the basin level has not exceeded more than 1/3'd of its total depth. The wetland
delineation report, based on visual evidence of vegetation in the area, indicates a maximum depth of
2 feet. City maintenance staff indicates that there have been no current flooding issues associated
with the basin water level. It is evident that the basin has a fast draw down rate.
Third, on February 11, 2011, staff commissioned a geotechnic:al engineer to conduct hand-auger
borings within the basin. Eight to nine foot borings were taken in the basin. Preliminary results
indicate that the soils are silty sands and are very loose. The loose soils in the basin are likely the
reason for the high infiltration rate.
Finally, staff is conducting an environmental study on the basin. Staff has commissioned S.E.H. for
the study. This is to assure that any spoils from the basin excavation or moving of soils is properly
disposed if there is contamination. Staff suspects that the basin was formerly a borrow pit for the
construction of 1-35E, and that the basin was backfilled with concrete and asphalt rubble. Over the
years, trash has collected in the basin due to illegal dumping.
DISCUSSION
Jackson Hole is classified as a Manage B wetland not adjacent to a lake. The ordinance requires a
75-foot averaged buffer from the delineated line. Because the 75-foot buffer extends into slopes
steeper than 18%, the buffer extends to 10-feet beyond the apex of all surveyed slopes. For the
purposes of design, staff assumes the entire City-owned parcel is within the required buffer. To
improve the current wetland area within the basin, staff is requesting the ENR Commission
recommend an exemption to use the buffer for storm water improvements pursuant to Ordinance
895 Section 5b(9).
Basin Improvements
As part of the Western Hills improvements, staff is proposing a storm drainage basin as well as slope
and wetland improvements within the basin. Refer to Attachment 3 to view the improvements which
will include the following:
1) Excavation of a secondary basin east of the current delineated wetland area. Storm
sewerrunoff from Jackson and Beaumont Streets will be directed into this new basin.
2) Establishment of the secondary basin with a Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR)
approved wetland seed mix and planting of sedges. The proposed design will uti.lize a
compost bed with a bonded-fiber matrix to ensure quick establishment of vegetation.
3) Repairs of severely eroded areas resulting from storm drainage. This is two-fold:
a' Storm sewers will be designed to discharge at the lowest elevation qf the basin,
minimizing velocities and future erosion. Rip-rap and erosion control matting will
be utilized for permanent stabilization and energy dissipation.
b. Fill in eroded areas, establish with a BWSR approved seed mix and bonded-fiber
matrix.
2
4) Select removal, clearing and treatment of low-quality trees or invasive species and
removal of deadfall within the basin. Staff will devise a tree replacement plan to follow
Tree Preservation Ordinance guidelines. City staff will work with the Natural Resources
Coordinator and Environmental Planner for proper clearing of select trees and planting of
new trees according to regulations.
5) Removal of surface trash and refuse that has collected in the basin.
Storm Water Manaoement
Staff will utilize Jackson Hole as part of overall neighborhood storm water management. Its current
status as a no-outlet basin is beneficial to area water bodies as it appears that the basin fully
infiltrates all runoff flowing to the basin. Staff also feels that the current wetland condition needs
improvement.
To augment the storm water infiltration and treatment that occurs in the basin, staff is proposing to
install several underground storm water treatment devices upstream of the pipe discharge points in
the basin. These treatment manholes will enable capture of larger sediment particles, debris and
floatable garbage, which will ease in collection by maintenance staff. The manholes will reduce
cleaning and maintenance needed for the ponding basin itself.
Commission Review
The wetland ordinance requires that the ENR Commission review waivers to the wetland ordinance
for public improvements, and forward a recommendation to the Planning Commission. The ENR
Commission was scheduled to review the Western Hills Area Street Improvement Project wetland
impacts on February 23, 2011; with the Planning Commission's review scheduled for March 15.
However, due to the fact the February ENR Commission meeting was canceled, the ENR
Commission's review must now follow the Planning Commission's review. Staff will update the ENR
Commission on the Planning Commission's March 15 review and recommendation during the
March 21,2011, ENR Commission meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff believes that the proposed improvements constructed within the wetland buffer of the basin will
enhance the current Manage B wetland. Staff requests the ENR Commission recommend
construction of public utilities and storm water improvements within the wetland buffer of the Jackson
Hole basin and move this recommendation forward to the City Council.
Attachments
1. Site Location Map
2. Wetland Ordinance
3. Basin Improvements Plan
3
<l,l
-
o
==
=
o
~
C.I
~
~
Attachment 1
"
"
~ . ~
!! llJ "'~ '"
, "! " ~iil
~iH t IDhu
i-"" ...i,"~~ <I id!
~~cJj.J!j~! ~(ll!
Ig8.5Slg~~eg;:f1
\'\'\\01::" .
"
.~
..
'C
"
.
"
o
"0
"
"
.a
~
o
"8 ~
. c
S
'~.i-~
sss
<8"'~
.5 ~]
"'~ fr"E
]5.:9
~ <l) ~
~ g~
~] ~
.,gf::]
~.s~
S:-"O e
8 ~ ~
. " "
~~,SJ .s
0..9
e'~8
.~~N
~ -.
o ~ g
00.
0"'_
",""''"
"'<':IS
15 ~.g
:;<l)~
]~8
00"
;~..
" .
'''''"
" e 0
.s a3....
os2!
00.
.~ ~~
]..0 ~
.0
>'-0
~ Ii s
:88
....IS ~
oo~
o _
g.]c;
E-oN
"O.s_~
-E2!M
o. .
f~ g
bt;;~
i~~"
.2se
.0C>
t On 0)
"""
~'G ~
;;; ~ ~
.- O..J
g.'!;j ~
:.;I=:n
i'!];::
.. <<10
~gN.
:;s'i;:;:;
-.
<-0
,.,
U
on
is
<l)
~
~
S
<l)
-
c:
<l)
~
....l
"0
a
-
<l)
<l)
'"
(/)
S
on
".
"
'"
.....
"
8
.
'"
00
"'
~
g
on
Attachment 2
ORDINANCE NO. 895
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AND CRITICAL AREA ARTICLE OF THE CITY CODE
The Maplewood City Council approves the following changes to the Maplewood Code of
Ordinances:
This amendment revises portions of Article VII. (Environmental Protection and Critical Area)
dealing with wetlands.
Section 1. Findings.
a. Wetlands serve a variety of beneficial functions. Wetlands help maintain water quality
by filtering suspended solids and pollutants. They reduce flooding and erosion, provide
open space for human interaction, and are an integral part of the city's environment.
Depending upon their type, size, and location within a watershed, they represent
important physical, educational, ecological, aesthetic, recreational, and economic assets
of the city. Properly managed wetlands are needed to support the city's efforts to reduce
flooding and to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare.
b. Wetlands and buffers provide habitat for aquatic, semi-aquatic, and terrestrial wildlife,
including rare, threatened, or endangered species. They provide breeding, nesting and
feeding grounds for many forms of plant and animal life. Many species of wildlife require
both wetlands and their associated upland buffers for survival. Protecting wetlands and
buffers is essential for preserving the diversity of plant and animal species in the city.
c. Streams are also significant elements of the city's hydrologic system. Streams flow into
wetlands and lakes, provide food and habitat for wildlife, provide open space, and are an
integral part of the city's environment. Like wetlands, streams are an important physical,
ecological, aesthetic, recreational, and economic asset.
d. Various existing state and federal laws restrict activities and development within
wetlands and streams. The city finds that development adjacent to and surrounding
wetlands may also degrade and pollute wetlands or accelerate the aging or elimination
of wetlands and that development next to streams may degrade, pollute, or damage
streams and, in turn, degrade other surface waters downstream. Regulating
development and land use around wetlands and streams is therefore in the public
interest.
e. As defined and used herein, buffers are land areas adjacent to wetlands and streams
that are deemed important for maintaining the health and valuable functions of such
wetlands and streams. Restricting development of and land use in buffers recognizes
that the surrounding upland impacts the quality and functions of wetlands and streams
and, therefore, is in the public interest.
f. Buffers planted with native or naturalized vegetation serve the following functions:
(1) Stabilize soil and prevent erosion.
1
(2) Preserve and enhance the quality of surface water by reducing the input of
suspended solids, nutrients, and harmful chemical substances that may
adversely impact public health or aquatic habitat.
(3) Filter suspended solids, nutrients, pollutants, and harmful substances so that
they do not enter the wetland or stream.
(4) Moderate water level fluctuations during storms.
(5) Protect beneficial plant life and provide habitat for wildlife.
(6) Provide shade to reduce the temperature of both stormwater runoff and the
wetland, thereby helping to maintain the conditions for healthy aquatic life.
(7) Reduce the adverse impacts of human activities on wetlands and streams and
thereby preserve them in a natural state.
g. In addition to regulating development and land use around wetlands, this ordinance is
intended to educate the public (including appraisers, owners, potential buyers, and
developers) about the importance of wetlands and streams and the functions of buffers
and to encourage property owners who live adjacent to and/or near wetlands and
streams to be responsible stewards by managing and enhancing the quality of buffers as
hereinafter described.
Section 2. Definitions.
The following words, terms, and phrases when used in this ordinance shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in this section, except where the context of the word, terms, and phrases
clearly indicates a different meaning.
Administrator means the director of the community development department or other person or
persons charged with the administration and enforcement of this ordinance.
A/teration means human action that adversely affects the vegetation, hydrology, wildlife or
wildlife habitat in a wetland, stream or buffer, including grading, filling, dumping, dredging,
draining, paving, construction, application of gravel, discharging pollutants (including herbicides
and pesticides), and compacting or disturbing soil through vehicle or equipment use. Alteration
also includes the mass removal or mass planting of vegetation by means of cutting, pruning,
topping, clearing, relocating, or applying herbicides or any hazardous or toxic substance
designed to kill plant life. Alteration does not include the following activities in a buffer:
a' Walking, passive recreation, fishing, or other similar low-impact activities.
b. The maintenance of pre-existing, nonconforming lawn area.
c. The removal of trees or vegetation that is dead, dying, diseased, noxious, or hazardous
in a manner that does not cause the compacting or disturbing of soil through vehicle or
equipment use.
2
d. The removal of noxious weeds by non-chemical methods, or by means of chemical
treatment in accordance with application methods that prevent the introduction of toxic
chemicals into wetlands and streams.
e. The removal of non-native shrubs, such as buckthorn, if:
1. there is little chance of erosion; and
2. site is flat or generally has slopes less than 6 percent grade; and
3. cut and treat method of removal is used on shrubs more than one-half (Y>) inches
in diameter (not pulling).
f. Selective management of vegetation as follows:
1. Selective pruning of trees or shrubs in order to enhance their health.
2. Selective removal of tree saplings (less than 2 inches in diameter) in order to
enhance wildlife value of the buffer.
3. Selective removal of non-native trees.
4. Selective removal of non-native weeds.
5. Selective seeding or planting of vegetation that is native to Minnesota.
g. Installation of temporary fencing without footings.
h. Projects within the buffer that are the subject of a wetland buffer management worksheet
approved by the administrator.
Best manaaement oractices (BMP's) mean measures taken to minimize negative effects of
stormwater runoff on the environment including, but not limited to, installation of rain gardens,
infiltration basins, infiltration trenches, retention basins, filters, sediment traps, swales, reduction
of impervious surfaces, planting of deep-rooted native plants, landscape and pavement
maintenance.
Buffers are land areas adjacent to wetlands and streams in which development and land use
are restricted as set forth herein and in which the growth of native and naturalized plants and
trees are to be preserved and encouraged in accordance with this ordinance.
Clearina means the cutting or removal of vegetation.
Enhancement means an action that increases the functions and values of a wetland, stream, or
buffer.
Erosion means the movement of soil or rock fragments, or the wearing away of the land surface
by water, wind, ice, and gravity.
Infiltration basin means a pond or basin that captures stormwater and allows it to soak into the
ground. An infiltration basin will typically drain within forty-eight (48) hours of a storm event.
Lake means an area of open, relatively deep water that is large enough to produce a wave-
swept shore. Lake shall also be defined as a "public water" as delineated and listed in the city's
shoreland ordinance (Article IX).
3
Laroe-scale oroiect means a vegetation maintenance, control, removal, mitigation or restoration
project that will affect more than fifty percent (50%) of a buffer located on a piece of property.
Lawn area means that area within a buffer with maintained landscape, including areas of
mowed turf grass, gardens, play areas, work areas, patios, play structures, and nonpermanent
structures. Lawn area does not include: (1) areas within a buffer consisting of native or
naturalized vegetation; and (2) the land area that is outside of a buffer.
Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MnRAM) is a scientific methodology to assess the
quality of wetlands.
Mitiaation means an action that reduces, rectifies, eliminates, or compensates for the alteration
of a buffer or wetland.
Native area means an area where native vegetation exists.
Native veaetation means tree, shrub, grass, or other plant species that are indigenous to the
Twin Cities metropolitan area and that could have been expected to naturally occur on the site.
Native vegetation does not include noxious weeds.
Naturalized area means an area where naturalized vegetation exists and does not include a
lawn area.
Naturalized veaetation means tree, shrub, grass, or other plant species that exists on a site.
naturally without having been planted or maintained as a lawn area. It may be a native or non-
native species.
Nonconformina lawn area means that area within a buffer with maintained landscape (lawn
area) as of the date of adoption of this ordinance. Once a nonconforming lawn area is
converted to native or naturalized buffer, it loses its legal nonconforming status and may not
thereafter be treated as a nonconforming lawn area.
Noxious weed means plants listed as prohibited noxious weeds in the Minnesota Noxious Weed
Law. (See also weed.)
Ordinarv hiah water mark (OHWM) means a mark delineating the highest water level
maintained for enough time to leave evidence upon the landscape. The ordinary high water
mark is commonly that point where the natural vegetation changes from predominantly aquatic
to predominantly terrestrial.
Public waters means water basins assigned a shoreline management classification by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources commissioner under Minnesota Statutes, sections
103F.201 to 103F.221, except wetlands less than 80 acres in size that are classified as natural
environment lakes.
Rain aarden means an infiltration basin that is planted as a garden that allows water to infiltrate
within forty-eight (48) hours of a storm event.
Restoration means restoring a wetland, stream, or buffer in whole or in part to a condition that is
similar to that before development of the surrounding area.
4
Selective means vegetation management done in a naturalized or native buffer, where a
minimal amount of vegetation is altered, with the goal of improving ecological quality of the
buffer andlor its ability to filter stormwater runoff.
Semipublic means land that is maintained by a private organization for public use.
Setback means the minimum horizontal distance between a structure and the nearest edge of
the wetland, stream, or buffer.
SloDe means the inclination of the natural surface of the land from the horizontal; commonly
described as a ratio of the length to the height.
Stormwater pond means a pond that has been created to capture stormwater runoff. It is a
natural wetland. Stormwater is often piped into stormwater ponds but may also enter through
sheet runoff.
Stormwater pond edGe means the normal high water level for a stormwater pond.
StraiGht-edGe setback is a measurement to determine the allowable setback of an addition to an
existing house, garage, deck or driveway which is located closer to or within the required buffer.
Straight-edge setback additions are measured by using the existing edge of the house, garage,
deck, or driveway located nearest to the edge of a buffer, wetland, or stream and extending that
line in a parallel direction. No portion of the addition can encroach closer to the edge of a buffer,
wetland, or stream than the existing structure.
Stream means those areas where surface waters produce a defined channel or bed. A defined
channel or bed is land that clearly contains the constant passage of water under normal
summer conditions.
Structure means anything constructed or erected that requires location on the ground or
attached to something having location on the ground.
Sustainable desiGn means a development design which minimizes impacts on the landscape.
Temporary erosion control means methods of keeping soil stable during construction or grading.
Temporary erosion control measures include, but are not limited.to, silt fencing, erosion control
blankets, bale slope barriers, or other best management erosion control methods approved by
the city.
Variance means a deviation from the standards of this ordinance that is not specifically allowed.
VeGetation means any plant life growing at, below, or above the soil surface.
Weed means a plant which causes damage in some way to native vegetation or ecosystems.
(See also noxious weed.)
Wetlands means those areas of the city inundated or saturated by groundwater or surface water
at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.
Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas as defined. Where a
person has removed or mostly changed the vegetation, one shall determine a wetland by the
5
presence or evidence of hydric or organic soil and other documentation of the previous
existence of wetland vegetation such as aerial photographs. This definition does not include
lakes or stormwater ponds as .herein defined.
Wetlands adiacent to lakes means those areas of land or vegetation that have been classified
as wetlands by an applicable Watershed District in accordance with the Minnesota Routine
Assessment Method (MnRAM) system but which are attached to or part of the edge of a lake as
defined herein.
Wetland classes are defined follows:
a' Manaae A wetlands are based on the "Preserve" wetland classification as defined in
MnRAM. These wetlands are exceptional and the highest-functioning wetlands in
Maplewood.
b. Manaae B wetlands are based on the "Manage 1" wetland classifications as defined in
MnRAM. These wetlands are high-quality wetlands.
c. Manaae C wetlands are based on the "Manage 2" wetland classifications as defined in
MnRAM. These wetlands provide moderate quality.
d. Storm water Pond - These are ponds created for stormwater treatment. A stormwater
pond shall not include wetlands created to mitigate the loss of other wetlands.
Wetland functions mean the natural processes performed by wetlands. These include providing
wildlife food and habitat, maintaining the availability of water, purifying water, acting as a
recharge and discharge area for groundwater aquifers, moderating the flow of surface water and
stormwater, and performing other functions including but not limited to those set out in U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers regulations.
Wetland buffer manaaement worksheet is a printed form available through the community
development department which is required to be completed by a property owner who wishes to
undertake certain activities in a wetland or stream buffer. The activities proposed by the
property owner on the worksheet must be approved by the administrator prior to any work in the
buffer.
Wetland or stream edae means the line delineating the outer edge of a wetland or stream. The
wetland edge shall be established using the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating
Jurisdictional Wetlands dated January 10, 1989, and jointly published by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, or succeeding publication that is adopted by the Federal
Government. The applicable watershed district must verify this line.
Section 3. Applicability and Effective Date.
a. Applicability.
1. This ordinance shall take effect after the city publishes it in the official
newspaper.
6
2. Except as specified elsewhere in this ordinance, this ordinance shall apply to all
real property which is located in a wetland, stream, or buffer or any person or use
that would alter a wetland, stream, or buffer after adoption of this ordinance
(December 14, 2009).
3. The city adopts the wetland classification map dated December 14, 2009, which
is based on wetland classifications from the MnRAM studies and assigned by the
applicable watershed district. Other wetland classification regulations are as
follows:
a. The city council will adopt changes to the wetland map which are based
on MnRAM studies conducted and approved by watershed districts.
b. Any wetland not currently assigned a classification based on MnRAM
studies as of the date of the adoption of this ordinance (December 14,
2009) shall carry over the city's April 24, 1995, wetland classifications and
shall be assigned the following management classes:
1) Class 1 wetlands are defined as Manage A wetlands.
2) Class 2 wetlands are defined as Manage A wetlands.
3) Class 3 wetlands are defined as Manage B wetlands.
4) Class 4 wetlands are defined as Manage C wetlands.
5) Class 5 wetlands are defined as stormwater ponds.
c. Wetlands adjacent to lakes will be regulated by this ordinance until
December 31,2012, or until the city adopts a new shoreland ordinance
that includes the regulation of these wetlands, whichever occurs first.
d. Appeals to the wetland classifications are within the jurisdiction of the
applicable watershed district and shall be filed and heard pursuant to the
administrative review process of that district. In the event that an appeal
is granted, the city will recognize the results of that appeal for purposes of
the classification of wetlands within the city.
4. When any provision of any ordinance conflicts with this ordinance, the provision
that provides more protection for buffers, wetlands, or streams shall apply unless
specifically provided otherwise in this ordinance. This also applies to the
applicable watershed district regulations.
b. Exemptions. This section does not apply to the following property located in the city
limits of Maplewood:
1. Property which is located within a buffer, but is separated from the wetland or
stream by an existing road.
7
2. Buildings and structures not in conformity with the regulations prescribed in this
ordinance as of its effective date shall be regarded as nonconforming and may
continue.
3. Lawn areas not in conformity with regulations prescribed in this ordinance as of
its effective date shall be regarded as nonconforming and may continue. A
nonconforming lawn area will lose its legal nonconforming status if it is converted
to native or naturalized buffer and may not thereafter be treated as a lawn area.
Section 4. Buffer Widths and Requirements.
a. Minimum buffers. The following are the minimum required buffer widths and structure
setbacks:
Buffer
Wetland Classes
Manage A Stormwater
& Streams Manage B Manage C Pond
Minimum Buffer Width
100 ft.
75 ft.
50 ft.
10ft.
Structure Setback from
Edge of Buffer
o
o
o
10ft.
b. Buffer measurement. Buffers shall be measured from the wetland or stream edge.
c. Buffers containing slopes. For new development or construction on slopes greater
than eighteen percent (18%) that are within a buffer, the buffer width shall be increased
to ten (10) feet beyond the apex of the slope. Extension of the buffer for steep slopes
shall apply to all wetland classes.
d. Buffers for wetlands adjacent to lakes. In light of the fact that lakes perform different
functions than wetlands and streams and are used for different recreational purposes,
wetlands adjacent to lakes and their designated buffers shall have alternative buffers.
The following alternative buffers for wetlands adjacent to lakes will apply until
December 31,2012, or until the city adopts a new shoreland ordinance that includes the
regulation of these wetlands, whichever comes first.
Buffer
Wetland Classes (for Wetlands Adjacent to Lakes)
Manage A Manage B Manage C
Minimum Buffer Width
75ft.
50 ft.
50 ft.
e. Average Buffers: Recognizing that there are instances where, because of the unique
physical characteristics of a specific parcel of land, the averaging of buffer width for the
entire parcel may be necessary to allow for the reasonable use of the land during a
development or construction project. In such cases decreasing the minimum buffer
width will be compensated for by increased buffer widths elsewhere in the same parcel
to achieve the required average buffer width.
8
1. The average buffer standards set forth below may be applied based on an
assessment of the following:
a) Undue hardship would arise from not allowing the average buffer, or
would otherwise not be in the public interest.
b) Size of parcel.
c) Configuration of existing roads and utilities.
d) Percentage of parcel covered by wetland.
e) Configuration of wetlands on the parcel.
f) Averaging will not cause degradation of the wetland or stream.
g) Averaging will ensure the protection or enhancement of portions of the
buffer which are found to be the most ecologically beneficial to the
wetland or stream.
2. The following are the average buffer widths:
Buffer
Wetland Classes
Manage A
& Streams Manage B Manage C
Minimum Buffer Width
75 ft.
50 ft.
50 ft.
Average BufferWidth
100 ft.
75 ft.
NIA
3. Average buffer measurement. Average buffer measurement shall be determined
by averaging the buffer along the wetland edge situated on the subject property,
not the entire wetland.
4. A mitigation plan is required for construction of development projects which meet
the requirements described in Section 5.d. (Mitigation).
5. The appropriateness of using average buffers will be evaluated as part of the
review of the contractor's or owner's development application. The average
buffer used must be within the spirit and intent of this ordinance and must meet
one or more of the requirements described in Section 7 (Best Management
Practices).
6. The administrator must approve the average buffer.
7. If an average buffer is denied by the administrator, an applicant may appeal the
denial by submitting a written appeal request to the administrator within fifteen
(15) days of the administrator's written denial of the average buffer. The
administrator shall send appeals of average buffers to the environmental and
natural resources commission for review.
9
8. If an average buffer is denied by the environmental and natural resources
commission, an applicant may appeal the denial by submitting a written appeal
request to the administrator within fifteen (15) days of the commission's denial of
the average buffer. The administrator shall send these appeals to the city council
for final review.
Section 5. Development and Construction.
a. Unless an exemption applies, the following development and construction activities are
not allowed in wetlands, streams, or buffers:
1. Alterations, including the filling of wetlands.
2. The construction of structures.
3. Projects which convert native or naturalized areas to lawn area.
4. The construction of stormwater drainage facilities, sedimentation ponds,
infiltration basins, and rain gardens within a buffer.
5. Discharge of stormwater to a wetland not in compliance with the city's
stormwater management ordinance (Section 44-1245, or subsequent
ordinances).
b. Exemptions. This section does not apply to the following activities in a buffer:
1. Walking, passive recreation, fishing or other similar low-impact activities.
2. The maintenance of pre-existing, nonconforming lawn area.
3. The removal of trees or vegetation that is dead, dying, diseased, noxious, or
hazardous in a manner that does not cause the compacting or disturbing of soil
through vehicle or equipment use.
4. The removal of noxious weeds by non-chemical methods, or by means of
chemical treatment in accordance with application methods that prevent the
introduction of toxic chemicals into wetlands and streams.
5. The removal of non-native shrubs, such as buckthorn, if:
a) there is little chance of erosion; and
b) site is flat or generally has slopes less than 6 percent grade; and
c) cut and treat method of removal is used on shrubs more than one-half (Y>)
inches in diameter (not pulling).
6. Selective management of vegetation as follows:
a) Selective pruning of trees or shrubs in order to enhance their health.
b) Selective removal of tree saplings (less than 2 inches in diameter) in
order to enhance wildlife value of the buffer. .
c) Selective removal of non-native trees.
10
d) Selective removal of non-native weeds.
e) Selective seeding or planting of vegetation that is native to Minnesota.
7. Installation of temporary fencing without footings.
8. Projects within the buffer that are the subject of a wetland buffer management
worksheet approved by the administrator.
9. Public or semi-public streets and utilities. The city council may waive the
requirements of this ordinance for the construction or maintenance of public or
semipublic streets and utilities through buffers where it determines that there is a
greater public need for the project than to meet the requirement of this ordinance.
In waiving these requirements the city council shall apply the following standards:
a) The city may only allow the construction of public or semipublic utilities
and streets through buffers where there is no other practical alternative.
b) Before the city council acts on the waiver the planning commission and
the environmental and natural resources commission shall make a
recommendation to the city council. The planning commission shall hold a
public hearing for the waiver. The city shall notify the property owners
within five hundred (500) feet of the property for which the waiver is being
requested at least ten (10) days before the hearing.
c) Utility or street corridors shall not be allowed when endangered or
threatened species are found in the buffer.
d) Utility or street corridors, including any allowed maintenance roads, shall
be as far from the wetland as possible.
e) Utility or street corridor construction and maintenance shall protect the
wetland and buffer and avoid large trees as much as possible.
f) The city shall not allow the use of pesticides or other hazardous or toxic
substances in buffers or wetlands; however, in some situations the use of
herbicides may be used if prior approval is obtained from the
administrator.
g) The owner or contractor shall replant utility or street corridors with
appropriate native vegetation, except trees, at preconstruction densities
or greater after construction ends. Trees shall be replaced as required by
city ordinance.
h) Any additional corridor access for maintenance shall be provided as much
as possible at specific points rather than to the road which is parallel to
the wetland edge. If parallel roads are necessary they shall be no greater
than fifteen (15) feet wide.
i) The city council, upon recommendation of the administrator, may require
additional mitigation actions as a condition of granting the waiver.
11
10. Public or semipublic trails. The city may waive the requirements of this
ordinance for the construction or maintenance of public or semipublic trails
through buffers, and boardwalks in wetlands, where it determines that there is a
greater public need for the project than to meet the requirement of this ordinance.
In waiving these requirements the city shall apply the following standards:
a) Trails shall not be allowed when endangered or threatened species are
found to be present in the buffer.
b) Buffers shall be expanded, equal to the width of the trail corridor.
c) The owner or contractor shall replant all disturbed areas next to the trail in
a timeframe approved by the city.
d) All necessary erosion control measures must be in place before
constructing a trail. The erosion control measures must also be
maintained and inspected by the city to ensure that the wetland or stream
is not compromised by trail construction activities.
e) The trail must be designed and constructed with sustainable design
methods.
f) Boardwalks are allowed within the buffer and shall be a maximum of six
(6) feet in width for semipublic use and twelve (12) feet in width for public
use.
g) The administrator may require additional mitigation actions as specified in
Section 5.d. (Mitigation).
c. Construction Practices. Special construction practices shall be required on projects or
developments adjacent to wetlands and adjacent to and in their buffers. Special
construction practices shall be approved by the administrator before issuance of a
grading or building permit. Such practices may include, but are not limited to, grading,
sequencing, vehicle tracking platforms, additional silt fences, and additional sediment
control. They may also include the following:
1. Wetland Buffer Sign Standards: The city may require that a property owner or
developer install wetland signs before grading or starting construction. The buffer
will be identified by installing wetland signs on the boundary between a buffer
and adjacent land. These signs shall mark the edge of the buffer and shall state
there shall be no building, mowing, cutting, filling, or dumping beyond this point.
These signs shall be installed at each lot line where it crosses a wetland or
stream buffer, and where needed to indicate the contour of the buffer, with a
maximum spacing of one-hundred (100) feet of wetland or stream edge.
2. Erosion Control Installation: Before grading or construction, the owner or
contractor shall put into place erosion control measures around the borders of
buffers. Such erosion control measures must remain in place until the owner and
contractor have finished all development activities that may affect the buffer.
12
3. Erosion Control Breaches: All erosion control measures must be maintained and
inspected to ensure compliance and protection of wetlands, streams, and buffers.
The owner or contractor shall be responsible for all erosionlsedimentation
breaches within the buffer and shall restore impacted areas to conditions present
prior to grading or construction activities.
4. Erosion Control Removal: After completion of grading or construction, the
contractor or owner may remove the erosion control measures only after
inspection and approval by the city and the applicable watershed district to
ensure the areas affected have been established per requirements.
5. Platting: When platting or subdividing property, the plat" or subdivision must show
the wetland boundaries as approved by the applicable watershed district.
6. It is the responsibility of the owner to alleviate any erosion during and after
completion of grading or construction. The owner or contractor must remove
erosion control measures after final approved inspection by the city and the
applicable watershed district.
d. Mitigation. For large-scale projects or new development or construction, the city
requires mitigation when a property owner or contractor has altered or will alter a
wetland or buffer. The property owner or contractor shall submit a mitigation plan to the
administrator for approval. In reviewing the plan, the city may require one or more of the
following actions:
1. Reducing or avoiding the impact by limiting the degree or amount of the action,
such as by using appropriate technology.
2. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the buffer.
3. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by prevention and maintenance
operations during the life of the actions.
4. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute
buffer land at a two-to-one ratio.
5. . Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures.
6. Where the city requires restoration or replacement of a buffer, the owner or
contractor shall replant the buffer with native vegetation. A restoration plan must
be approved by the city before planting.
7. Any additional conditions required by the applicable watershed district andlor the
soil and water conservation district shall apply.
8. A wetland or buffer mitigation surety, such as a cash deposit or letter of credit, of
one hundred and fifty percent (150%) of estimated cost for mitigation. The surety
will be required based on the size of the project as deemed necessary by the
administrator. Funds will be held by the city until successful completion of
restoration as determined by the city after a final inspection. Wetland or buffer
13
mitigation surety does not include other sureties required pursuant to any other
provision of city ordinance or city directive.
Section 6. Activities in Wetlands, Streams, and Buffers.
a. Unless an exemption applies, the following activities are not allowed in wetlands,
streams, or buffers: .
1. Alterations, including the filling of wetlands.
2. The construction of structures.
3. Projects which convert native or naturalized areas to lawn area.
4. The construction of stormwater drainage facilities, sedimentation ponds,
infiltration basins, and rain gardens within a buffer.
5. The discharging of stormwater to a wetland must comply with the city's
stormwater management ordinance (Section 44-1245, or subsequent stormwater
ordinances).
b. Wetland buffer management worksheet. A wetland buffer management worksheet is
required for certain activities within a wetland and stream buffer:
1. The administrator must approve wetland buffer management w,orksheets.
2. If a wetland buffer management worksheet is denied by the administrator, an
applicant may appeal the denial by submitting a written appeal request to the
administrator within fifteen (15) days of the administrator's written denial of the
average buffer. The administrator shall send appeals of average buffers to the
environmental and natural resources commission for review.
3. If a wetland buffer management worksheet is denied by the environmental and
natural resources commission, an applicant may appeal the denial by submitting
a written appeal request to the administrator within fifteen (15) days of the
commission's denial of the average buffer. The administrator shall send these
appeals to the city council for final review.
c. Exemptions. This section does not apply to the following activities in a buffer:
1. Walking, passive recreation, fishing or other similar low-impact activities.
2. The maintenance of pre-existing, nonconforming lawn area.
3. The removal of trees or vegetation that is dead, dying, diseased, noxious, or
hazardous in a manner that does not cause the compacting or disturbing of soil
through vehicle or equipment use.
4. The removal of noxious weeds by non-chemical methods, or by means of
chemical treatment in accordance with application methods that prevent the
introduction of toxic chemicals into wetlands and streams.
14
5. The removal of non-native shrubs, such as buckthorn, if:
a) there is little chance of erosion; and
b) site is flat or generally has slopes less than 6 percent grade; and
c) cut and treat method of removal is used on shrubs more than one-half (Y2r
inches in diameter (not pulling).
6. Selective management of vegetation as follows:
a) Selective pruning of trees or shrubs in order to enhance their health.
b) Selective removal of tree saplings (less than 2 inches in diameter) in
order to enhance wildlife value of the buffer.
c) Selective removal of non-native trees.
d) Selective removal of non-native weeds.
e) Selective seeding or planting of vegetation that is native to Minnesota. .
7. Installation of temporary fencing without footings.
8. Projects within the buffer that are the subject of a wetland buffer management
worksheet approved by the administrator.
g. For properties that are zoned single or double-dwelling residential or are used as
a single or double-dwelling residential use:
a) The use, maintenance, and alteration of existing nonconforming lawn
area for the purpose of outdoor enjoyment which may include gardening,
nonpermanent structures (including such things as storage sheds under
120 square feet in area, swing sets and volleyball nets), impervious
patios, or fire pits.
b) Work within a wetland, stream, or buffer which was approved by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources water permitting process
and access to those areas by a traif which is limited to the width of the
permit.
Section 7. Best Management Practices.
The city encourages and in some cases requires that best management practices be
implemented to minimize negative effects of stormwater runoff on the environment and the loss
of wildlife habitat when a property owner or contractor has altered or will alter a wetland, stream,
or buffer. Best management practices may include the following:
a. Restore buffer with native plantings. For large-scale projects or new development or
construction refer to Section 5.d. (Mitigation).
b. Manage weeds in buffer. Pursuant to state law, all weeds listed on the Minnesota
noxious weed list must be controlled by the property owner. Owners are encouraged to
control other weeds that are not on the noxious weed list but can threaten the health of a
wetland. Submittal of a wetland buffer management worksheet is required for
management of weeds within the native and naturalized areas of buffers, except for
selective treatment. In addition, a management plan drafted by a professional
15
experienced in wetland and stream restoration may be needed for large-scale projects or
new development including:
1. Target weeds.
2. Appropriate management techniques, including the use of chemical treatment if
approved by the administrator as part of the management plan.
3. Management schedule.
4. Erosion control and reseeding if management will create large areas of dead
vegetation.
5. Cash escrow or letter of credit to cover 150 percent of the required work.
c. Reduce stormwater runoff and/or improve the quality of stormwater runoff
entering a wetland or stream. This may be achieved through the following strategies
or other administrator approved best management practices for dealing with stormwater.
These practices are to be located outside of the wetland buffer.
1. Reduce amount of pavement on site (i.e. fewer parking stalls, narrower
driveways, shared parking with other businesses).
2. Use pervious pavement such as pavers or porous asphalt.
3. Use turf pavers or modified turf areas for overflow parking.
4. Install rain garden or infiltration basin.
5. Install rock trench or rock pit.
6. Install filter strip of grass or native vegetation.
7. Install surface sand filter or underground filter.
8. Install native plantings on site to reduce fertilizer use and improve infiltration.
g. Install a green roof on buildings.
10. . Install grit chambers, sediment traps, or forebays.
Section 8. Variances.
a. Procedures. Procedures for granting variances from this ordinance are as follows:
1. The city council may approve variances to the requirements in this ordinance.
2. Before the city council acts on a variance the environmental and natural
resources commission will make a recommendation to the planning commission,
who will in turn make a recommendation to the city council. The planning
commission shall hold a public hearing for the variance. The city shall notify
16
property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the property for which the
variance is being requested at least ten (10) days before the hearing.
3. The city may require the applicant to mitigate any wetland, stream, or buffer
alteration impacts with the approval of a variance, including but not limited to,
implementing one or more of the strategies listed in Section 5.d. (Mitigation).
4. To approve a variance, the council must make the following findings as depicted
in Minnesota Statutes, section 44-13:
a) Strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of
circumstances unique to the property under consideration. The term
"undue hardship" as used in granting a variance means the owner of the
property in question cannot put it to a reasonable use if used under
conditions allowed by the official controls; the plight of the landowner is
due to circumstances unique to his property, not created by the
landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the locality. Economic considerations alone are not an undue
hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this
ordinance.
b) The variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this
ordinance.
b. Exemptions to Variances. Variances are not needed for the following:
1. A nonconforming single or double-dwelling residential structure which loses its
nonconforming status as described in Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357,
subdivision 1 (e) is allowed to be rebuilt on its same footprint in its entirety
(including foundations and decks) in the buffer if the new single or double-
dwelling family residential structure meets the following conditions:
a) Best management practices are implemented to help protect the wetland
as described in Section 7 (Best Management Practices). The
administrator approves the location and best management practices
through the building permit process.
b) All other applicable building ordinance requirements are met.
2. A nonconforming manufactured home which is located within a wetland buffer
can be replaced with a new manufactured home without approval of a variance
as long as the replacement meets with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes,
section 462.357, subdivision 1(a).
3. Additions to a nonconforming single or double-dwelling family house, garage,
deck, or driveway using the existing straight-edge setbacks to a wetland or
stream if the following apply:
a) Property that is zoned single or double-dwelling residential or is being
used as a single or double-dwelling residence.
17
b) There is no other reasonable alternative than encroachment toward the
wetland or stream with the addition.
c) The new addition of the house, garage, deck, or driveway is a minimum of
twenty-five (25) feet from the wetland or stream edge.
d) The process of constructing the addition does not cause degradation of
the wetland, stream, or the existing buffer.
e) Mitigation actions must be met as specified in Section 5.d. (Mitigation).
Section 9. Enforcement.
The city reserves the right to inspect the site or property during regular city business hours or
upon notice to the property owner or its designated representative one business day in advance
if the inspection is to occur at a different time for compliance with this ordinance during
development or construction or alteration pursuant to an approved wetland buffer management
worksheet or plan.
The city shall be responsible for the enforcement of this ordinance. Any person who fails to
comply with or violates any section of this ordinance may be charged with a misdemeanor and,
upon conviction, shall be subject to punishment in accordance with misdemeanor level
convictions as set by State Statute. The violator may be civilly fined andlor liable for restoration
costs as well. All land use building and grading permits shall be suspended until the developer
has corrected the violation. Each day that a separate violation exists shall constitute a separate
offense.
The city council approved the first reading of this ordinance on November g, 2009.
The city council approved the second reading of this ordinance on December 14, 2009.
Signed:
Will Rossbach, Mayor
Date
Attest:
Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk
18
'"
~
~~83~~m~~!
~~:::~:~-
C');:oUlr::l)>~I'T1~~
~e(");:o(l)mG)(")
alg~' !2M~g~
i!)OUl ~OCD -I
['1Z~ Q~e;d'
;:::(1) ('T1;:o1'T1
~O OUi~~
!!!"T'J ~:tlo~
-,:. -Io;;:j
~ ~~
PI> ('T1~ F
~
''"
%:
.,
ti
,
J
("
"'
-'"
I
'"
",
"".
"
'-
r\
f/
(
n
~
~
~
~
~
~
n
~
o
,
~
8urnc:J(
:;:OI'TlOI'Tl;:::Olll~
~~2gS~PS
o;:::z'i)o()R..
;;:j~);~~;;1-1
o 8r;lzl'TlooX
~ '"~;~~~I
:;:O~~5~:t~
.J>lIl>:::E^l'Tlr
'-IZI'TlZI'Tl:;:O
II OOOC')ZI'Tl
.....lDlDZ09;;::
OI'TlO ;:oZ~
o e 1'Tl)>
5 ~~r
> C >
~ ~5l1l
"
"
" '''''"
", "',
"
'.;~
'\"
0'"
'"
-.....,"
'>
,
,
-'.
--\.
,
(
Atlachmen!3
IITITTI
lliililJ
~
1I11
~~
C!,C!,
~~
>c
rr
~r
~~
NN
mm
~--.-
o
,"m-z-~'"I
r~ ~",.
J"O~ 'z:Ez
~~~()-I~
~~r~UJ?J
. ':e-l('T1
g........ggg:J::j
~g~~8.
~:... @~
~
'"
O:;:O;;::5~z
z.8~C')o~
()ee lIl~
~;;o~~or:
-11'Tl()J<>Z
('T1;;:: -I^ ()
:;:ol'Tlel'Tl(")e
. z :;:000:;:0
-I1'Tl Zr
lIl:;:o"lJ-11'Tl
UJI'Tl;oX
- ~o
'< r
,"m"~1
>;O(/)::1
z~~ci-
~gr:S
. (")(");;::
o~x
z'
-1.....(.01 .
~ ~
o 0
r .
~~~ ~~V>
6~~gitJ~
8~r:;;:: ~el
~ m
::!=<~~~o
~"lJ""""-I('T1"lJ
;:01'Tl8lDO'i)
;::OJ-1S;:!;1'Tl
~ ~x~
!!! l'TIez
1< ;-I:-J~
0121S1<
",
-~-
171
"
~r
~~--
0,
~Fii
rm
cfli
~'"
i;j~
'"
- :- }----L
._J1STf~."___..
r -~~.;..-
. ,L...,~
m /
f'
0"
&-1'
, >
JACKSON ST.
>
.._""._~ :1'""
r-r-
IT!-. 8
I.!,-:-/' '* <;
I;] ! ;
0:.'''';:''1 '0:1 :;":,0:",..
:, I <","'~~"J" ~
:-.: II 17
;.
,
PT ) rm1
lD
City of MapJewood
0EPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DMSION
1_Cou"ljI~ood8~
""""_......_.'llI1011
(1l51l2'~_:z.ooo F'Al<(1l51l~-2<Ol1
. ,"""'''''''''''''''....'''''.....
""""""'"'"'''''''''''''''.''0''
SIJI'DII'I!lIIlN<>"""'....DlA.Y
l:1.~~~~~
JACKSON-LARPENTEUR LOW
WETLAND IMPROVEMENT
PONDING SITE
STE'VENL"UMMER.P.E.
..~..!Ll.aLll_",~
Agenda Item 5.e.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Shann Finwall, AICP, Enyironmental Planner
Enyironmental and Natural Resources Commission 2010 Annual
Report
March 11,2011 for the March 21 ENR Commission Meeting
DATE:
INTRODUCTION
Annually the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission submits a report to the city council
which outlines the actions and activities taken by the commission during the preceding year,
recommendations needed to existing ordinances or policies based on past reviews, and goals
envisioned for the upcoming year. The report serves as a means of relaying important information
to the City Council on the Commission's accomplishments and obtaining feedback on proposed
goals.
RECOMMENDATION
Review and offer feedback/comment on the attached ENR Commission 2010 Annual Report.
Attachment: Environmental and Natural Resources Commission 2010 Annual Report
Attachment
City of Maplewood
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
2010 Annual Report
March 21, 2011
Preface
The Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission is charged with protecting,
preserving and enhancing the environment of the City of Maplewood.
Members
The ENR Commission consists of seven members appointed by the City Council. Membership
terms are for three years, with extensions for additional terms approved by the City Council. The
current membership is as follows:
Board Member
Membership Beoan
Term Expires
Bill Schreiner
Judith Johannesen
Dale Trippler
Randee Edmundson
Carole Lynne
Carol Mason Sherrill
Ginny Yingling
06/09/08
07/14/08
02/25/08
02/08/10
11/27/06
11/27/06
11/30106
09/30/11
09/30/11
09/30/12
09/30/12
09/30/13
09/30/13
09/30/13
Chair and Vice Chair
Each year the commission appoints commissioners to serve as chair and vice chair of the
commission. On January 13, 2011, the commission appointed Commissioner Schreiner to be the
chair and Commissioner Edmundson to be the vice chair. In 2010 the chair was Commissioner
Trippler and the vice chair was Commissioner Schreiner.
Meetinos
The ENR Commission's meetings are held the third Monday of every month at 7:00 p.m. In 2009,
the ENR Commission held 13 meetings. Twelve of those meetings were regularly scheduled
monthly meetings, and one was a special meeting - recycling contractor informational meeting prior
to the release of the city's request for proposal for a new recycling contract.
2010 Attendance
Commissioner
Attendance
Dale Trippler
Carol Mason Sherrill
Randee Edmundson
Ginny Yingling
Judith Johannesen
Carole Lynne
Bill Schreiner
13 of 13
12 of 13
12 of 13
12 of 13
11 of 13
08 of 13
08 of 13
Reviews and Accomplishments
The ENR Commission is a strong element to the city's environmental planning. One of the
commission's missions is to develop and promote sustainable practices for city policies and
procedures. In 2010 the ENR Commission worked on the following environmental issues:
1. Chicken Ordinance to Encourage Sustainable Foods
2. Stormwater Ordinance
3. Fish Creek Greenway Ad-Hoc Commission
4. Eureka Recycling 2009 Year-End Recycling Report
5. Recycling Contract Request for Proposal
6. Flood Plain Ordinance
7. Renewable Energy Ordinance
8. Extreme Green Makeover Judging
g. Review of two wetland variances.
10. Review of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit
11. Emerald Ash Borer
12. Greenways.
13. Collection System Analysis
14. Neighborhood Environmental Groups
15. Maplewood 2011 Street Project - Western Hills Area
Outside Activities
1. Waterfest
2. Community Development and Parks Tour
3. National Night Out Recycling Bin Distribution
4. Collaborative Joy Park Buckthorn Removal Project
5. Spring and Fall Clean Ups
Goals
During the ENR Commission's January 13, 2011, Goal Setting Meeting, the commission chose to
carry over their 2010 goals to 2011 as follows:
1. Trash Hauling (Organized Collection)
2. Greenways
3. Neighborhood Environmental Groups
On April1g, 2010, the commission created subcommittees to assist in the implementation of these
goals, with two to three commissioners appointed to each subcommittee (Organized Collection -
Commissioners Trippler, Lynne, Schreiner; Greenways - Commissioners Yingling and
Johannesen; Neighborhood Environmental Groups - Commissioners Mason Sherrill, Edmundson,
and Johannesen). The subcommittees will conduct research, interviews, and assist staff in review
of the goals and report back to the full commission. The full commission will make
recommendations on any policies proposed for these goals.
Conclusion
The ENR Commission will continue to carry out the mission of the commission as follows:
2
1. Establish environmental priorities for the city.
2. Make recommendations on policies, procedures and ordinances that control, protect,
preserve, and enhance the city's environmental assets.
3. Participate in the mission and goal of the Maplewood Nature Center and Neighborhood
Preserves.
4. Promote greater use and appreciation of the city's environmental assets.
5. Sponsor environmental projects to enhance, repair, replace, or restore neglected or
deteriorating environmental assets of the city.
6. Develop educational programs that foster the mission of the commission.
7. Develop and promote sustainable practices for city policies and procedures.
3
Agenda Item 6.a.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Enyironmental and Natural Resources Commission
Ginny Gaynor, Natural Resources Coordinator
Emerald Ash Borer Plan
March 11, 2011 for March 21, 2011 Commission Meeting
INTRODUCTION
In Spring 2009, Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) was discovered in St. Paul, Minnesota.
Communities throughout Minnesota are developing plans to manage this pest. In Fall
2010, Maplewood's City Forester presented information on EAB to the Enyironmental
and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission and gathered commissioners' input for
managing EAB in Maplewood. At the March 21, 2011.meeting, commissioners will
reyiew the proposed EAB plan.
DISCUSSION
Emerald ash borer is a non-native beetle that causes widespread decline and death of
ash trees. The larval stage of EAB feeds on the tissue between the bark and the
sapwood, disrupting the transport of nutrients and water in the tree. EAB has destroyed
millions of ash trees in other states. In 2009, EAB was found in St. Paul, MN. Since
then communities haye been developing plans to respond to EAB infestation. At the
Noyember 15, 2010 ENR meeting, the city's contracted Forester, Andy Hovland,
presented background information on EAB and gathered input from commissioners.
Mr. Hovland and city staff have prepared a draft EAB plan (Attachment 1). The plan
recommends using a combination of management strategies including inyentory,
inspection, strategic remoyal, possible use of insecticide, biological control, and
replanting. At the March 21st meeting, commissioners will discuss the plan and make
recommendations. In particular, we ask commissioners to consider the following:
1. Do you support the completion of a boulevard tree inventory? (page 2)
2. Do you support preemptiYe remoyal of ash trees based on health? (page 3)
3. Do you support preemptiye removal of ash trees based on area? (page 3)
4. What is your position on insecticide use to treat EAB? (page 4-5)
5. Are there additional references or website links you'd like included in the plan?
6. Is there any1hing you disagree with in the plan?
7. Is there any1hing else you'd like to see in the EAB plan?
At the November 2010 ENR Commission meeting, most commissioners indicated they
did not support the use of insecticides to treat EAB. Staff and City Forester share the
ENR commissioners' concerns regarding potential negatiYe impacts of treating EAB
with insecticides. And staff supports the position that the city not treat ash trees if it
becomes eyident that Minnesota will lose all its ash in the next seyeral decades.
Howeyer, we belieye the city should not completely close the door on the use of
pesticides. In the plan we propose that if biological controls for EAB proye effective,
and if there is a good chance that a combination of monitoring, strategic remoyals,
biocontrol, and insecticide treatment can preyent wholesale loss of ash trees, then the
city should consider limited pesticide treatment as part of its management strategy.
The reference sheet in the EAB plan (Appendix C) provides links to information on EAB
pesticides, including a link to the 12-page brochure commissioners receiyed in their
Noyember 2010 commission packet. Three additional publications are attached that
summarize the literature but differ in their messages (Attachments 2, 3 and 4). Two of
the articles focus specifically on imidacloprid. Commissioner Yingling researched some
of the chemicals used to treat EAB and proYided 25 technical articles to staff. If you
would like electronic copies of these articles, please contact Ginny Gaynor.
The Parks Commission is scheduled to reyiew the draft EAB plan at their March 16,
2011 meeting. Staff will present the draft plan to City Council in April or May 2011.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff requests that the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission proYides
input and recommendations on the proposed Emerald Ash Borer Management Plan.
Attachments:
1. Proposed Emerald Ash Borer Management Plan
2. FAQ sheet by enthomologists from three states
3. FAQ sheet on imidacloprid by Sierra Club-Canada
4. Journal of Pesticide Reform article
2
Attachment 1
Proposed Emerald Ash Borer Management Plan
City of Maplewood, Minnesota
First Draft: March 11, 2011
I, Purpose
The purpose of this management plan is to address and plan for the eventual invasion of Emerald Ash
Borer (EAB) into Maplewood urban forests. The goal of this plan is to slow the spread of the infestation
through education, inspection, and strategic management. By defining and beginning management
now we hope to lessen disruption to our urban forest, stretch the management costs associated with
EAB over a longer period of time, and create an atmosphere of EAB awareness to detect an infestation
as early as possible.
II. Applicability
This plan is applicable to all public land in Mapiewood and all private properties where EAB mav
negatively impact public areas or general'v threaten the overall health of Maplewood's urban forest.
III. Administration
Maplewood's CitV Forester and Natural Resources Coordinator will be responsible for impiementing
this program, with support from Parks and Recreation Department and Public Works Department.
IV. EAB Background
Emeraid Ash Borer (EAB) is a non-native beetle that causes widespread decline and death of ash trees.
The larvai stage of EAB feeds on the tissue between the bark and the sapwood, disrupting the
transport of nutrients and water in the trees. If infestation is high enough in an individual tree, the
damage will be severe enough to kill the tree. EAB has destroyed millions of ash trees in other states.
(See Appendices A, B, and C for more information.)
V. EAB Status in Minnesota
In 2009, EAB was found in southern Minnesota and in St. PauL The infestation in St. Paul was in the St.
Anthony area and on the University of Minnesota St. Paul Campus. Subsequently EAB was found in
Minneapolis, in the Tower Hill and Prospect Park areas. The metro infestations. are about 1 mile apart.
The Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA), Minnesota Department of Natural ReSources and
University of Minnesota have helped coordinate the response to the infestation and education. In St.
Paul this included ash tree removal in the infested areas as well as pre-emptive removal of ash in
selected neighborhoods. In 2010, the MDA released biological control agents (three species of wasps)
at the site of the southernMN infestation. The MDA plans to do a release in the metro area in 2011.
VI, EAB Management Strategies
When EAB was first found in Minnesota, it was believed that we would eventually lose all ash trees in
Minnesota. But EAB may spread differently in Minnesota than it has in other states, since it appears
that we have found it relatively early in the infestation. SLAM (Slow Ash Mortality) is an approach to
EAB that focuses on slowing ash tree mortality through integrated management strategies. It mav
involve a combination of monitoring for EAB, pre-emptive removal of ash treeS, insecticide treatment,
and biological controL Slowing the spread of EAB and slowing ash tree mortality enables us to spread
management costs over a longer time period. In addition, with biological control now a possibility, the
outlook for ash In Minnesota could be different than initially predicted.
1
VI-l EAB Management: Tree Inventory
A tree inventorv is the foundation of an EAB plan and provides the baseline data for a citV's urban
forestrv program. The data can also be used to track management of individual trees, similar to the
wav a city tracks infrastructure maintenance (ex: stormsewer structures).
In 2010, Maplewood hired S&S Tree Specialists to conduct a compiete inventorv for park (not
preserve) trees including location, species, diameter, and health. Onlv manicured areas of parks were
inventoried. Maplewood parks have 2507 trees, 484 of which are ash (19.3%). In 2010, staff
inventoried a sampling of boulevard trees. The protocol being used requires we inventorv a minimum
of 2000 boulevard trees in order to estimate how manv trees we have on boulevards. This sampling
will be completed in 2011.
The boulevard sampling and the complete park tree inventory provide data that enables us to
understand the potential financial, aesthetic, and ecological impacts of EAB in Maplewood. But a
complete bouievard tree inventorv, with information on the health of each tree, is required for the citV
to strategicailv target individual trees for treatment or removal, and to make planting decisions that
ensure tree diversitv.
It is stronglv recommended that the citV hire a contractor t.!l do a complete inventorv of boulevard
trees. In addition, it is recommended that staff conduct informal inventori.es on a few natural areas in
the citV to obtain some basic information about the ash population in forested areas.
VI- 2 EAB Management: Inspection, Detection, and Monitoring
The goal of detection is to find infestations as earlv as possible. Once an infestation center is found,
we need to determine the duration and outer boundaries of the infestation. ManV people should be
involved in detection.
1. City Forester. Maplewood contracts a part-time forester to inspect properties for oak wilt and
Dutch Elm Disease. The forester's contract should be expanded to include EAB detection and
inspection. In addition, the CitV Forester should be the person responsible for delineating the
infestation boundaries.
2. City Staff. CitV staff need to be keV plavers in detecting EAB. It is recommended that staff at the
nature center and parks and public works crew members undergo EAB training so thev can help
monitor the ash trees in the areas where thev work. In addition, it is recommended that EAB
training be provided for all emplovees interested in iearning about the insect and its threat.
3. Residents and the Maplewood Tree Hotline. Residents will often be first to detect EAB on private
lands. IftheV have a tree with suspected EAB, theV are encouraged to review EAB information
online and/or call the Maplewood Tree Hotline. The citV forester responds to all calls and does a
site check if he can't rule out EAB during the phone conversation.
4. Arrest-The-Pest-Hotline, The state maintains an Arrest-the-pest-hotline. Citizens can call the
hotline to report a suspected incidence of EAB.
5. Minnesota Forest Pest First Detector network, The first detector network is the state's earlv
warning svstem for invasive tree pests. First detectors can heip verifv the presence of EAB.
6. Minnesota Tree Care Advisors. The tree care advisor program is a network oftrained, communitv-
based volunteers who promote urban and communitv forestrv to all residents of Minnesota. This
program is run bV the Universitv of Minnesota's Department of Forestry.
2
7. Citizen-monitoring program. Some Maplewood residents have expressed interest in learning
more about Emerald Ash Borer and its potential impact to the citV and the landscapes around their
homes. The citv should encourage interested residents to participate in the Forest Pest First
Detector program or the Minnesota Tree Care Advisor program so theV can help the citV watch for
EAB. The citV should consider paving the tuition for residents in these programs if thev commit to
volunteering hours for inspecting sites in the citV for EAB.
8. Purple Traps. In 2010, the Minnesota Department of Agriculture set purple traps throughout the
state, including in Maplewood. The purpose of the traps is to help the MDA better determine the
extent ofthe EAB infestation. The citV should continue working with the MDA to have these traps
set in Maplewood.
VI- 3 EAB Management -- Tree Removal
When ash trees die or decline theV become hazards near boulevards, buildings, and plav areas. Dead
trees and hazard trees will need to be removed. But strategic removal of trees before theV die,
whether thev are infested or not, should also be a part of the citV's EAB management strategy.
Strategic removal heips spread out removal and replanting costs and mav help slow the spread of EAB.
The citV should use four removal strategies:
1. Remove trees that die. Some trees mav not be detected earlv in the infestation process so theV
will be removed when thev die. On boulevards and in landscaped area of parks, all dead ash trees
should be removed. In natural areas, it will not be feasible to remove all dead ash trees and
deadfall should be addressed on a site-bv-site basis. On private sites, owners should remove dead
trees that are hazardous to people or structures. ,
2. Remove trees that are infested. A good detection program must be in place to use this removal
strategv. Tvpicallv infestation centers are not detected for 3-S vears after insects arrive due to
subtleties of initial signs in the tree. When an infested tree is identified, surrounding trees will
need to be surveved to determine the extent of infestation and the number of trees that will need
to be removed. The citv should consult with the MDA when infestations are initiallv identified.
3. Remove trees preemptively based on health. Selective removal of public ash trees based on
health condition should be a part of the city's EAB strategv. In order to use this strategv the citV
will have to compiete a boulevard tree inventory, including health information for each tree. The
citV has this data for park trees. The ash trees that would be considered for removai include:
a. Unhealthv trees-inventoried trees that have a condition rating of four or less (out of ten).
b. Trees that are unsafe due to poor health or structure and are located where theV are likelv
to damage people and/or propertv (hazard trees).
c. Trees that are in conflict with utilities.
d. Trees that are poorlV iocated and/or require excessive maintenance.
4. Remove trees preemptively in an area. Preemptive removal bv area mav be appropriate in
situations such as:
a. When a large population of ash trees is near an existing infestation and there are a
significant number of trees in poor condition.
b. In conjunction with a public works project if the health of ash trees on a street would be
negative IV impacted bV the project and make them more susceptible to EAB.
c. In conjunction with adjacent cities or regional strategies to manage EAB.
A prioritv removai list should be developed and revised regularlv. In targeting trees for removal, the
following should also be considered:
1. Proximitv of ash tree removals to current infestation centers and their anticipated spread.
3
2. The number of trees in poor condition that are located near each other.
3. Spreading out removal costs over several vears.
VI- 4 EAB Management: Pesticide Treatment
Insecticides are available for managing EAB. When timed appropriatelv, these treatments can create a
toxic environment for the Emerald Ash Borer, killing dispersing adults as well as eggs and larvae. High
value ash trees can be preserved from EAB with consistent treatments over time. (See Appendix C for
references on EAB insecticides.) There are two primarv methods of pesticide application for EAB: soil
drenching and trunk injection. In soil drenching, the insecticide is applied to the soil under the tree
canopv and the tree roots take it in. In trunk injection, a hole is drilled into the tree trunk and the
chemical is injected into the tissues under the bark. With either method, the chemical is dispersed
throughout the tree. Emerald ash borers (and other insects) feeding on the tree Ingest the chemical
and are killed.
Pesticide treatment as part of EAB management has some benefits:
1. Repeated pesticide treatment can prevent .EAB infestation in a healthv ash tree.
2. Pesticides, in conjunction with tree removal, can be used to slow ash mortalitv and to reduce
avaiiable phloem to EAB larvae.
3. New tools mav become availabie in the future that are more effective at managing EAB. Using
pesticides to preserve higher quality ash trees buvs time for potential deveiopment of new
treatments.
4. With repeated treatment, some of the iarger ash trees mav be retained with all their benefits
including reduction in seasonal heating and cooling costs, water absorption, carbon sequestration,
wildlife value, and improved propertv values.
EAB pesticides also have negative environmental impacts:
1. Imidacloprid and Emamectin benzoate, the active ingredients of the two most common chemical
treatments for EAB, have potential negative impacts to wildlife. These insecticides are non-
selective and broad spectrum, thus, theV have the potential to harm both targeted and beneficial
insects.
a. Imidacloprid is toxic to birds and wildlife, mildlv toxic to fish, and has been linked to
eggshell thinning in birds (EPA Office of Pesticide Programs, 1994, Pesticide fact sheet:
Imidacloprid, Washington, D.C., March 18.).
b. It appears that imidacloprid is acute IV toxic to earthworms and honev bees. (EPA Office of
Pesticide Programs, 1994, Pesticide fact sheet: Imidacloprid, Washington, D.C., March 18;
Zang, Y. et al. 2000, Genotoxicitv oftwo novel pesticides on earthworm, Eisenia foetida.
Chemosphere 39:2347-2356.). It should be mentioned that ash trees are wind pollinated
and not bee pollinated so it would primarilv impact bees if leaching occurs into other plant
material that is bee pollinated.
c. The inert ingredients found in imidacloprid include two proven carcinogens: crvstalline
quartz silica and naphthalene (International Agencv for Research on Cancer, 1997, Silica,
http://193.S1.164.11/htdocs/Monographs/VoI68/SI L1CA. HTM; National T oxicologV
Program, Undated, ToxicologV and carcinogenesis studies of naphthalene (CAS No. 91-20-
3) in F344/N rats (inhalation studies)).
TR-SOO.).
d. Emamectin benzoate's MSDS label indicates it is highiV toxic to fish, mammals, and aquatic
invertebrates.
4
2. Imidacloprid has a high potential of leaching into groundwater. It is classified bV the EPA in
categorv I as having the highest leaching potential.
a. Compared with eleven other popular pesticides, Imidacloprid moved more quicklV through
soil than any of the other pesticides tested. (Voilner, L. and D. Klotz., 1997, Leaching and
degradation of pesticides in groundwater lavers; Environmental behavior of crop
protection chemicals, Vienna, Austria, International Atomic Energv Agencv, pp. 187-203.)
b. The other ten pesticides tested included diazinon, chlorpvrifos, and diuron which are
widespread water contaminants. (U.S. Geological Survev, 1999, The qualitv of our nation's
waters-nutrients and pesticides, Circular 1225, Reston, VA, USGS, p. 60.)
The cost of pesticides must also be considered. A tree must be treated for the duration of its life.
Frequencv of treatment varies with product from annualiv to everv two to four vears. If a tree will
eventualiv be removed, it mav not be worth investing in treatment for the short-term. This mav
depend on the number of other potentiallv infested ash trees the citV is managing at one time and the
proximitv of a confirmed infestation center from the tree in question.
Maplewood's Environmental and Natural Resources Commission is opposed to the citV using
insecticides to treat EAB. Commissioners are concerned about the known environmental impacts, as
weil as the fact that little is known about how some of these chemicals interact in the environment.
The Parks and Recreation Commission is more open to chemical treatment to preserve high quality
specimens in citV parks where they are providing direct benefit to park users.
It is recommended that the citV leave the door open for limited use of insecticides to treat EAB. When
EAB was first found in Minnesota, it was predicted that ail ash trees in the state would be lost. But,
biological control was introduced in 2010, and if that proves effective, it mav change how EAB spreads
in Minnesota. If biological controi is effective, and if evidence becomes available that we mav be able
to save manv ash trees through a combination of management strategies-insecticide, biological
control, and strategic removal-the citv should consider the use of insecticide treatment for EAB.
Under this scenario, chemical treatment might be appropriate in the following situations:
1. Atparks: For large specimen ash trees, in exceilent health, that are important for shading and
aesthetics.
2. On boulevards: As part of strategic management, targeting healthv trees in neighborhoods near
EAB infestations. The citV could also consider a program that ailows residents to applv for a permit
to hire a contractor to treat a tree in the right-of-way in front of their home.
If pesticides are used on citV projects, on IV trunk injection should be ailowed. The citV's educational
literature for homeowners should c1earlv point out the negative impacts of pesticide use and
recommend that homeowners never use soil drench treatments for EAB.
VI-5 EAB Management: Biological Control
The Minnesota Department of Agriculture considers biological control the best option of cost-
effective, long-term management of EAB. In 2010, the MDA released wasps that kiil EAB eggs or larvae
in Houston Countv, in southeast Minnesota. This release will be monitored to determine its efficacv.
The MDA plans to do a release in spring 2011 near the infestation in Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Appendix D contains information on biological control for EAB. If biological control for EAB proves
effective, the citv should coordinate with the MDA for release of these biocontrol agents in
Maplewood.
5
VI- 6 EAB Management: Wood Disposal and Utilization
EAB can spread through transportation of ash wood-in logs, tree waste, chips or fire wood.
Restricting the movement of ash wood can help slow the spread of EAB. Ramsev Countv and selected
counties in Minnesota are under an ash quarantine which prohibits movement of ash out of the
countv. The quarantine restricts movement of firewood of all deciduous species. Businesses that
need to move the restricted items across countv lines mav applv for Compliance Agreement that
indicates how theV will treat the regulated articles to mitigate the spread of EAB.
If large numbers of ash die, it is essential to look for wavs to dispose of or utiiize ash wood.
Information continues to be published on potential markets for urban wood utiiization. Possible uses
for ash wood include fuel (biomass energv chips), mulch, pulpwood, and sawlogs. The citV should
identifv locai options for disposal and wood utilization. In addition, the citV should seek partnerships
with nearbv cities for disposal and utilization.
VI- 7 EAB Management: Replanting
The loss of ash in our urban forest will have a visual and ecological impact. It is recommended that at
ieast one tree be planted for everv tree removed or lost to EAB. Increased diversitv should be a keV
eiement in our replanting program. There are different models for boulevard tree diversitv. For
example, Dave Hanson from the Universitv of Minnesota promotes the 10-20-30 rule: plant no more
than 10% of anv species, 20% of anv genus, and 30% of anv familv. Prior to moving forward with
replanting, the citV should develop a street tree master plan that sets goals for our urban forest,
ensures diversitv of tree species within neighborhoods, identifies appropriate tree species, and
addresses planting and care guidelines.
Maplewood's Tree Rebate program provides a cost-share match for residents to piant trees on private
land. It is recommended that the citV continue funding this program and, if needed, adjust the
program so it supports residents in replanting after ash removal.
VII Education and Outreach
Education and outreach are essential components of the EAB Management Plan. The citV shall
develop an EAB education and outreach program that:
1. Educates residents so theV understand the threats of EAB, know what to look for, know what to do
when theV find EAB or a declining ash tree, and can make good decisions for ash trees on their
propertv.
2. Educates parks and public works staff so theV can recognize signs and symptoms of EAB
infestation.
3. Uses diverse forums for education including: public programs, website, articles in citV
publications, handouts, public service announcements, etc.
4. Provides advance notification to a neighborhood or homeowner of ash tree management that will
occur in their area.
VIII Ordinance and Policy
CitV code should be reviewed and revised to account for EAB. Two sections of code in particular mav
need revision:
6
1. Section 38, Article I. This section prohibits planting in the public right-of-wav. If we have major
losses of boulevard trees our ordinance should allow for and encourage replacement. Staff and
Communitv Design Review Board should review this policV and make recommendations to council.
2. Section 38, Article II. This section is the basis for our tree disease inspection program. It allows
the citV to control and eliminate Dutch elm disease fungus and elm bark beetles and "other
epidemic diseases of shade trees." The ordinance should be revised to specify Emerald Ash Borer.
In addition, the citV should develop a Street Tree Master Plan and policV that addresses:
1. Goals for street trees;
2. Guidelines and design templates for species diversitv;
3. List of appropriate species;
4. Guidelines for planting and care.
IX Licencing/permitting
As part of EAB management, the citV should review requirements for tree contractors licensed in the
citV and determine whether revisions are necessarv.
X Funding
Funding will be needed to implement the EAB management plan. Primarv costs include:
1. Boulevard tree inventorv (estimate: $20,000-$25,000);
2. City forester - increased hours for detection and inspection. Maplewood's citV forester is
contracted for 150-170 hours per vear, primarilv to inspect public and private properties for oak
wilt and Dutch Elm disease. We will need a significant increase in forester hours once EAB is found
in Maplewood.
3. Tree removal (staff or contractors);
4. Pesticide treatment of selected trees, if approved as part of the EAB plan (staff or contractors);
S. Education and public outreach (staff and citV forester);
6. Replanting (staff, contractors, volunteers).
Estimated cost for removal and replanting ash trees at Maplewood parks is $242,000-$338,800. This is
based on 484 ash trees, with average removal cost of $300 per tree and $200 to $400 per tree for
replanting. While smaller trees establish well and catch up in size to larger trees in a few vears, it is
thought that planting larger trees on boulevards and in public places helps reduce vandalism and
accidental injurv of trees. When the sampling inventorv of bouievard trees is completed in 2011, we
will be able estimate removal and replanting costs for boulevard trees.
Maplewood will need to secure funding for EAB management.
1. Grants. Currentiv there is no long-term grant funding dedicated to assisting communities in
Minnesota to manage EAB. An initial round of grants was available for EAB planning and
management. Maplewood will need to staV informed on grant opportunities. To be competitive,
it will be helpful to strengthen the citV's urban forestrv program. Having an EAB plan, a tree
inventorv, and a street tree policV will all be looked at in a positive light.
2. Operating funds or fees, The citV willlikelv need to use some general operating funds for EAB
management. Some communities have budgeted operating funds for EAB. St. Paul proposed a 2%
surcharge on right-of-waV rates dedicated to EAB management.
7
3. City's tree fund. The city's tree fund could be used to complete the boulevard tree inventorv and
for some tree planting. But this funding will not go far, and its purpose is not to control tree
disease and pests.
4. Tree donations. The funding package should also consider a tree donation program. Currentlv
Friends of the Parks and Trails (St. Paul and Ramsev CountV) has tree donation and Tribute Tree
programs that serve cities in Ramsev Countv, including Maplewood. Publicizing these programs, or
creating our own donation program, will help provide plant material and funds for planting trees
at parks.
XI Summary of Actions Needed
Appendices:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Conduct inventory of boulevard trees.
Develop details for strategic removal and re-evaluate the plan frequentlv.
Develop strategies for disposal or utilization of ash.
Develop and provide educationai and outreach materials for residents.
Educate staff in parks and public works to recognize EAB.
Implement program for volunteers to help detect EAB in Maplewood.
Review and revise tree disease ordinance to include EAB as a forest pest that should be
controlled on private land.
Develop a street tree master plan that includes goals for street trees, guideline's for species
diversitv, lists of appropriate species, guidelines for planting and care.
Develop list of MDA Certified Pesticide Applicators that have experience treating trees with
EAB.
Secure funding for EAB management.
8.
9.
10.
Pest Alert - Emerald Ash Borer
Do I Have EAB?
EAB References
Biological Control for EAB
What are other metro communities doing to manage EAB?
8
Appendix A
United States
Department of Agriculture
Forest Service
Northeastern Area
State and Private Forestry
NA-PR.02-04
Revised September 2008
Emerald Ash Borer
A beetle from Asia, Agrilu5 planipennis Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), was identified in July
2002 as the cause of widespread ash (Fraxinus spp.) tree decline and mortality in southeastern
Michigan and Windsor, Ontario, Canada. larval feeding in the tissue between the bark and
sapwood disrupts transport of nutrients and water in a tree, eventually causing branches and the
entire tree to die. Tens of millions of ash trees in forest, rural, and urban areas have already been
killed or are heavily infested by this pest.
A. pJanipennis has been' found throughout Michigan, across much of Ohio, and in parts of Indiana,
Illinois, Maryland, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin. Infestations have
also been found in more areas of Ontario and in the province of Quebec. The insect is likely to be found in additional areas as
detection surveys continue. Evidence suggests that A. planipennis is generally established in an area for several years before it is
detected.
The broad distribution of this pest in the United States and Canada is primarily due to people inadvertently transporting infested
ash nursery stock, unprocessed logs, firewood, and other ash commodities. Federal and state quarantines in infested states now
regulate transport of these products.
Identification
Adult beetles are generally larger and brighter green (Fig. 1) than the native North
American Agrilus species. Adults are slender, elongate, and 7.5 to 13.5 mm long. Males
are smaller than females and have fine hairs, which the females lack, on the ventral side
of the thorax. Adults are usually bronze, golden, or reddish green overall, with darker,
metallic,emerald green wing covers. The dorsal side of the abdomen is metallic purplish
red and can be seen when the wings are spread (Fig. 2). The prothorax, the segment
behind the head and to which the first pair of legs is attached, is slightiy wider than the
Figure 1. Adult emerald ash borer.
head and the same width as the base of the wing covers.
Larvae reach a length of 26 to 32 mm, are white to cream-colored, and dorso-ventrally
flattened (Fig. 3). The brown head is mostly retracted into the prothorax, and only the
mouthparts are visible. The abdomen has 10 segments, and the last segment has a pair
of brown, pincer-like appendages.
Biology
A. planipennis generally has a l-year life cycle. In the upper Midwest, adult beetles
begin emerging in Mayor early June. Beetle activity peaks between mid June and early
July, and continues into August. Beetles probably live for about 3 weeks, although
some have survived for more than 6 weeks in the laboratory. Beetles generally are Figure 2. Purplish red abdomen on adult
beetle.
most active during the day, particularly when it is warm and sunny. Most beetles
appear to remain in protected locations in bark crevices or on foliage during rain or
high winds.
Throughout their lives beetles feed on ash foliage, usually leaving small, irregularly
shaped patches along the leaf margins. At least a few days of feeding are needed
before beetles mate, and an additional 1 to 2 weeks of feeding may be needed
before females begin laying eggs. Females can mate multiple times. Each female
probably lays 30-60 eggs during an average lifespan, but a long-lived female may lay
more than 200 eggs. Eggs are deposited individually in bark crevices or under bark
flaps on the trunk or branches, and soon darken to a reddish brown. Eggs hatch in
7 to 10 days. Figure 3. Second, third, and fourth stage larvae.
After hatching, first instar larvae chew through the bark and into the phloem and
cambial region. Larvae feed on phloem for several weeks, creating serpentine
(S-shaped) galleries packed with fine sawdust-like frass. As a larva grows, its gallery
becomes progressively wider (Fig. 4). Beetle galleries often etch the outer sapwood.
The length of the gallery generally ranges from 10 to 50 cm. Feeding is usually
completed in autumn.
Prepupal larvae overwinter in shallow chambers, roughly 1 cm deep, excavated
in the outer sapwood or in the bark on thick-barked trees. Pupation begins in
Figure 4. Gallery of an emerald ash borer larva.
Figure 5. D-shaped hole where an
adult beetle emerged.
Figure 6. Jagged holes left by
woodpeckers feeding on larvae.
Figure 7. Ash tree killed by
emerald ash borer. Note the
serpentine galleries.
Figure 8. Epicormic branching on
a heavily infested ash tree.
late April or May. Newiy eclosed adults often remain in the pupal chamber or bark for 1 to 2
weeks before emerging head-first through a D-shaped exit hole that is 3 to 4 mm in diameter
(Fig. 5).
Studies in Michigan indicate 2 years may be required for A. planipennis to develop in newly
infested ash trees that are relatively healthy. In these trees, many A. planipennis overwinter as
early instars, feed a second summer, overwinter as prepupae, and emerge the following summer.
In trees stressed by physical injury, high A. p/anipennis densities, or other problems, all or nearly
all larvae develop in a single year. Whether a 2~year life cycle will occur in warmer southern
states is not yet known.
Distribution and Hosts
A. p/anipennis is native to Asia and is found in China and Korea. It is also reported in Japan,
Mongolia, the Russian Far East, and Taiwan. In China, high populations of A. p/anipennis occur
primarily in Fraxinus chinensis and F. rhynchophylla, usually when those trees are stressed by
drought or injury. Other Asian hosts (F. mandshurica var. japonica, Ulmus davidiana var. japonica,
Jug/ans mandshurica var. siebo/diana, and Pterocarya rhoifolia) may be colonized by this or a
related species.
In North America A. p/anipennis has attacked only ash trees. Host preference of A. planipennis
or resistance among North American ash species may vary. Green ash (F. pennsy/vanica) and
black ash (F. nigra), for example, appear to be highly preferred, while white ash (F. americana)
and blue ash (F. quadrangulata) are less preferred. At this time all species and varieties of native
ash in North America appear to be at risk from this pest.
Signs and Symptoms
It is difficult to detect A. planipennis in newly infested trees because they exhibit few, if any!
external symptoms. Jagged holes excavated by woodpeckers feeding on late instar or prepupal
larvae may be the first sign that a tree is infested (Fig. 6). D-shaped exit holes left by emerging
adult beetles may be seen on branches or the trunk, especially on trees with smooth bark
(Fig 5). Bark may split vertically over larval feeding galleries. When the bark is removed from
infested trees, the distinct, frass-filled larval galleries that etch the outer sapwood and phloem
are readily visible (Fig. 4 and Fig. 7). An elliptical area of discolored sapwood, usually a result of
secondary infection by fungal pathogens, sometimes surrounds galleries.
As A. pfanipennis densities build, foliage wilts, branches die, and the tree canopy becomes
increasingly thin. Many trees appear to lose about 30 to 50 percent of the canopy after only a
few years of infestation. Trees may die after 3 to 4 years of heavy infestation (Fig. 7). Epicormic
shoots may arise on the trunk or branches of the tree (Fig. 8), often at the margin of live and dead
tissue. Dense root sprouting sometimes occurs after trees die.
A. planipennis larvae have developed in branches and trunks ranging from 2.5 cm (1 inch) to 140
cm (55 inches) in diameter. Although stressed trees are initially more attractive to A. p/anipennis
than healthy trees are, in many areas all or nearly all ash trees greater than 3 cm in diameter have
been attacked.
Resources
For more information on the emerald ash borer and related topics.,.
. Visit the following Web sites:
Multi-agency Emerald Ash Borer Web Site:
www.emeraldashborer.info
USDA Forest Service: www.na.fs.fed.usjfhpjeabj
USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service:
www.aphis.usda.govlpianLhealth/
. Contact your state Department of Agriculture, State Forester! or
Cooperative Extension Office.
~IQ.
Published by:
USDA Forest Service
Northeastern Area
State and Private forestry
Newtown Square, PA 19073
www.na.fs.fed.us
'\ Federal Recycling Program
..... Printed on recycled paper.
Prepared by:
Deborah G. McCullough! professor, Departments of Entomology and Forestry, Michigan State University
Noel F. Schneeberger, Forest Health Program leader! and Steven A. Katovich! forest entomologist!
Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry! USDA Forest Service
Photo credits:
David L. Cappaert and Howard Russell, Michigan State University, www.forestryimages.org
Steven A. Katovich! USDA Forest Service! www.forestryimages.org
Edward Czerwinski, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, www.forestryimages.org
USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
, MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT I
OF AGRICULTURE
625 Robert 51. N., St. Paul, MN 55155-2538
www.mda.state.mn.u5
A.
Do I Have Emerald Ash Borer (EAS)?
I think my ash tree may be
infested with Emerald Ash Borer.
6'0 to step #3
I suspect I have seen an Emerald
Ash Borer.
-+ (Yo to step #5
Is my tree an ash?
{fyes, go to step #4
{{no, go to step #7
Does my ash tree have symptoms
of Emerald Ash borer?
If yes, go to step #5
{f no, gO/II step #7
Are the symptoms or insects EAB
look-alikes?
If yes, go /0 #7
{{ 110, go to #6
It could be EAB.
Contact the U of M Fllrest Resources
Extension tll find all EAR First Detec/or near
you: treei/!fiJ(w;.unll.edu or 612-624-31/20
It isn't EAB; so, what is it?
Visit the UniversilV of Minnesllta Extensilln
"If/hatc, Wrong With My Plant" websile 10
dillgnllse Ihe problem.
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
..=-.,...........~-
Review this guide
www.mda.state.mn.us/news/publications/ext/ashtreeid.pdf
Review this guide
www.emeraldashborer.info/files/E-2938.pdf
Review these guides
www.mda.state.mn.uslnews/pubi ications/ext/eablookalikes.pdf
00 ~
www.mda.state.mn.us/sitecore/content/Global/MDADocs/ "IS
pestsplants/eab/eabreference.aspx
www.forestry.umn.edu/extension/index.html
www.extension.umn.edu/gardeninfo/diagnostics/
decid uous/ ash/! ndex.htm I
1_"'li>>=Ml
.1---
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, an alternative form of communication is available upon request.
TDD: 1-800-627-3529. MDAis an equal opportunity employer and provider.
I DolhaveEABfactsheet.indd
Appendix C: EAB References
General EAB information
www.emeraldashborer.info
www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/horticulture/M1242.htm I
www.dnr.state.mn.us/invasives/terrestrialanimals/eab/slideshow.html
Minnesota Department of Agriculture:
Genera I: www.mda.state.mn.us/plants/pestm anagem entl ea b.aspx
Management strategies: www.mda.state.mn.us/plants/ oestm anagem ent/ ea bl eabstrategies.asox
Qua ranti ne i nformati on: www.mda.state.mn.us/en/plants/ oestma nagementl eabl a uara nti nefaa .aspx
B iocontrol: www.mda.state.mn.us/ola nts/oestmanagement/ ea bIb iocontrolinsem n .aspx
Insecticides for EAB:
16-page guide: www.emeraldashborer.info/files/multistate EAB Insecticide Fact Sheet.pdf
Environmental impacts of Imidacloprid: www.sierraclub.ca/national/orograms/health-
environment/oesticides/im idacloprid-fact-sheet.shtm I
Impacts: www.emeraldashborer.info/fiies/Potential Side Effects of EAB Insecticides FAQ.pdf
Homeowner guide:
www.mda.state.mn.us/en/plants/pestmanagement/- /med ia/Fi les/plantsl ea bl eabtreatm entgu ide
2.ashx
Note-Commissioner Ginnv Yingling has assembled several technical articles on EAB insecticides and
staff can make these available.
12
Appendix D: Biological Control
The following text is from the Minnesota Department of Agriculture website, 3/4/11:
Biological control (biocontrol) is the best option for cost-effective, long-term EAB popuiation reduction. A
variety of insecticides are available to treat individual, .high-value ash trees. Cost and logistical
considerations make these treatments impractical on a iarge scale. Biocontrol, already used successfully to
fight some weed and Insect pests in Minnesota, is considered the onlV feasible large-scale tool for combating
EAB. Biocontrol reunites a target pest with the insects or diseases that control the pest in its native range. In
this case, tiny, stingiess wasps that control EAB in Asia are released to reduce EAB damage. Prior to their
use, biocontrol organisms are thoroughlv tested to ensure they will not harm humans, native plant and
animal species, or the environment.
USDA rears three species of wasps as biocontrol agents for EAB. Two species kill EAB larvae. Tetrastichus
plan/pennisi adults find and insert their eggs into EAB larvae. Spathius agrili behaves simiiariv except that
the wasp eggs and developing wasps are attached to the outside of the EAB iarvae. The developing wasps
feed on and eventuallv kill the EAB larvae. Egg parasltoid, Gobius agrili, adults insert their eggs into EAB
eggs on ash bark. The developing wasps feed on and destroy the eggs.
13
Appendix E: What are other Metro Communities Doing to Combat EAB?
Below are notes on what nearbv communities are doing to manage EAB.
Saint Paul
. Removed all infested ash trees from initial infestation
. Created trap trees to monitor EAB population (destructive sampling of ash)
. Structured removal of full blocks of declining ash
. 2011: some pesticide treatment in infested areas
. 2011: residents will be allowed to hire licensed contractors to treat them via trunk injection
Minneapolis
. Removed all infested trees
. Trunk injection of select park trees
. 2011: release of biological near infestation
Ramsey County
. Removing 300 trees
. Trunk injection of 1600 trees in countV parksjgoif courses
Woodbury
. EAB plan is going to citV council in March 2011
. Ordinance will be updated to include EAB
. Not recommending chemical treatment at this time
. Council will determine whether or not to do preemptive removals
Cottage Grove
. Plans for trunk injection of 3000 blvd ash trees
. Plan calls for removal of 50-150 ash per Vear depending on several factors, including costs
. Plan calls for removal and replacement of approximatelv 1000 of their 4000 boulevard ash trees over
12 vears
. Possible structured removal of poorer qualitV public ash trees depending on funding
Roseville
. City council approved EAB plan in fall of 2010
. $100,000 budgeted for EAB, plus received $50,000 grant
. Each vear will remove some ash that are in poor condition
. Will treat some ash trees considered significant
. Residents mav treat boulevard ash trees if thev applv for a permit and use a licensed citV contractor
. Updating disease ordinance to include ash
North Saint Paul
. Allowing residents to register boulevard ash trees theV would like to have treated with the citV
. Planning on some structured removal
14
www.emeraldashborer.info
Attachment 2
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
EXTENSION
.
OARDC
EXTENSION
Frequently Asked Questions Regarding
Potential Side Effects of Systemic Insecticides
Used To Control Emerald Ash Borer
Jeffrey Hahn, Assistant Extension Entomologist, Department of Entomology, University of Minnesota
DanielA. Herms, Professor, Department of Entomology, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, The Ohio State University
Deborah G. McCullough, Professor, Department of Entomology and Department of Forestry, Michigan State University
What systemic insecticides are
commonly used to protect ash trees
from emerald ash borer (EAB)?
Systemic insecticides containing the active
ingredients imidacloprid, dinotefuran or emamectin
benzoate are commonly used to protect ash trees
from EAB. All three are registered for agricultural
use and have been designated bV the Environmental
Protection Agencv as Reduced-Risk insecticides
for certain uses on food crops. The most widely
used insecticide in the world, imidacloprid has
been utilized for manv vears to control pests of
agricultural crops, turfgrass, and landscape plants.
Because of its low toxicitV to mammals, it is also
used to control fleas and ticks on pets. Dinotefuran
is a relativelv new product that has properties
similar to those of imidacloprid, but it has not been
researched as thoroughlV. EmaCmectin benzoate,
derived from a naturallv occurring soil bacterium,
has been registered for more than 10 Vears as a
foliar spray to control pests in vegetable and cotton
fields and parasitic sea lice in salmon aquaculture.
Similar products are used in veterinary medicine as
wormers for dogs, horses, and other animals.
To control EAB, some products containing
imidacloprid or dinotefuran are applied as a drench
The invasive emerald ash borer has killed millions
of ash trees in North America.
directlv to the surface of the soil or injected a few
inches under the soil surface. Dinotefuran can also
be applied by spraving the bark on the lower five
feet of the trunk. Emamectin benzoate and specific
formulations of imidacloprid are injected directiv into
the base of the tree trunk. Systemic insecticides are
transported within the vascular system of the tree
from the roots and trunk to the branches and leaves.
This reduces hazards such as drift of pesticide to
non-target sites and applicator exposure that can be
associated with spraying trees with broad-spectrum
insecticides, and has less impact on beneficial
insects and other non-target organisms. Many
products registered for control of EAB can be applied
onlV bV licensed applicators. In all cases, the law
requires that anybody applving pesticides comply
with instructions and restrictions on the label.
Ash trees lining a street before (left) and after (right) they were decimated by EAB.
Precautions should be taken to prevent pesticides from reaching
surface or groundwater.
Will systemic insecticides applied
to the soil impact ground or surface
water quality?
Several surveys have been conducted in the United
States and Canada to monitor imidacloprid in
surface and groundwater. Results indicate that
imidacloprid is rarelv detected in surface water
in agricultural or urban areas. Similar monitoring
studies have not been conducted with dinotefuran,
which is more soluble in water. In the presence of
sunlight, imidacloprid and dinotefuran are verv
unstable in water and degrade rapid IV, which
reduces their environmental risk to surface water.
When not exposed to light, imidacloprid and
dinotefuran break down slowlV in water, and thus
have the potential to persist in groundwater for
extended periods. In survevs of groundwater,
imidacloprid was usuailv not detected. When
detected, it was present at very low levels, mostlv
at concentrations less than 1 part per billion (ppb)
with a maximum of 7 ppb, which are below levels
of concern for human heaith. The detections have
generailv occurred in areas with porous rockv or
sandV soils with little organic matter, where the risk
of leaching is high - and/or where the water table
was close to the surface.
Everv precaution should be taken to protect surface
and groundwater from pesticide contamination.
Trunk-injected insecticides pose little risk to ground
and surface water when used as directed because
the material is placed inside the tree.
To protect groundwater, soil applications of systemic
insecticides should be made immediatelv adjacent
to the trunk of the tree, which increases uptake (and
efficacv) because the high densitv of absorptive
roots in this area filters the chemical from the soiL
Systemic insecticides bind to varying degrees to
2
organic matter, silt, and ciaV, which restricts their
movement in soiL TheV should not be applied to
porous sandv soils lacking organic matter, especiailv
where the water table is shaliow, or when heavy rain
is predicted within the next 24 hours.
To protect surface water, svstemic insecticides
should not be applied to soil near ponds, lakes,
or streams. Soil drenches should not be applied
to sloped surfaces from which runoff can occur,
nor should pesticides be misapplied careiesslv to
impervious surfaces such as sidewalks or streets, or
otherwise ailowed to reach conduits to surface water
such as drains, ditches, or gutters.
The imidacioprid profile presented in the Extension
ToxicologV Network Pesticide Information concluded
there is generailv not a high risk of groundwater
contamination when products are used as directed
and appropriate precautions are taken. Similarly, the
Canadian Water Qualitv Guidelines for the Protection
of Aquatic Life noted that when imidacioprid is used
correct IV, it does not characteristicailv ieach into
deeper soil iavers.
Will these insecticides impact aquatic
organisms?
The toxicitV of imidacloprid to aquatic life varies.
Studies indicate it has low toxicitV to fish,
amphibians, and some aquatic invertebrates such
as Daphnia (smail aquatic crustaceans), but high
toxicitV to other invertebrates such as mvsid shrimp
(a salt water species) and larvae of some aquatic
insects such as midges, black flies, and mosquitoes.
Dinotefuran is not as thoroughlv researched, but
existing data reflect a pattern of toxicitV similar to
that of imidacloprid. Toxicitv to fish and Daphnia is
low, while mvsid shrimp are sensitive. As previouslV
noted, imidacioprid and dinotefuran are broken
down rapidly in water when exposed to light. In the
rare occasions when imidacloprid has been detected
in surface water, the levels were too low (less than 1
ppb) to impact even sensitive aquatic organisms.
Imidacloprid soil injections have been widelv used in
ravines of Smokv Mountain National Park and other
forested areas to control hemlock wooliV adelgid,
an invasive insect that is devastating hemlock trees
in the Appalachian Mountains. A risk assessment
prepared for the USDA Forest Service ("lmidacioprid
- Human Health and Ecoiogical Risk Assessment")
conciuded that these treatments pose negligibie
risk to aquatic organisms when applied as directed
to clav or loam soils, and that even a worst-case
scenario of a major spill of imidacloprid into a
smail pond would have negligible effects on fish,
amphibians, or toierant aquatic invertebrates. When
used as directed, imidacloprid soil treatments for
EAB control are unlikelv to impact aquatic organisms.
What about insecticide residues in
senesced leaves that fall from trees
in autumn?
This question has not been thoroughlv researched.
One studv conducted in experimental microcosms
found that imidacloprid residues in senesced
(dead) leaves from treated trees had no effect on
microbial respiration or decomposition, or survival
of leaf-shredding insects that decompose dead
vegetation. Insect feeding rates were decreased
bv imidacloprid concentrations of 1.3 parts per
million (ppm), while lower concentrations (0.8
ppm) had no effect. When leaf-shredding insects
or earthworms were given senesced maple leaves
with higher concentrations of imidacloprid (3-11
ppm), their feeding rates were reduced but their
survival was not affected. In another microcosm
studV, imidacloprid inhibited breakdown of leaf litter,
'but foliar concentrations in this studV (18-30 ppm
fresh weight) were more than an order of magnitude
higher than those reported in leaves from trees
treated for EAB control. In all of these experiments,
organisms were exposed onlV to leaves from treated
trees. In many situations, leaves from treated ash
trees would be mixed with senesced leaves of other
species growing nearbv.
Similar studies have not been conducted with
emamectin benzoate, which is broken down rapidly
by microbial activitv and sunlight. Because of its
short residual activity on the surface of leaves, it is
considered a biorational insecticide compatible with
integrated pest management programs, including
biological control. These characteristics suggest
that environmental impacts will be negligible as
emamectin benzoate is released from decomposing
leaves. Regulatory agencies concluded that foliar
applications of emamectin benzoate to vegetabie
crops will have no adverse effects on ground or
surface water, birds, mammals, fish, or aquatic
invertebrates when used as directed.
Will these insecticides harm honey
bees?
Ash trees are wind-pollinated and are not a nectar
source for bees. Furthermore, ash flowers are
produced ear1v in the growing season and are
present for onlV a limited number of days. It is highly
unlikely that bees wouid be exposed to svstemic
insecticides applied to ash.
Flowering plants that are pollinated bV bees or
other insects should not be planted immediatelv
adjacent to ash or other trees that will be treated
with svstemic insecticides applied to the soil, as theV
mav also absorb insecticide. Honev bees and other
insects can be affected when systemic insecticides
Honey bees and other pollinators can be harmed by insecticides
applied to flowering plants.
are translocated to nectar and pollen. lmidacloprid
is fatal to honev bees when it reaches high enough
concentrations, and can have harmful sublethal
effects at lower concentrations.
There has been much concern recentlv about
the potential role of imidacloprid and related
neonicotinoid insecticides in colonv collapse disorder
(CCD). Research is ongoing to investigate the relative
effects of pesticides, bee pathogens and parasites,
and nutrition on honev bee health. To date there are
no conclusive answers, but researchers have not
been able to establish a link between imidacloprid
and CCD. Stronger evidence implicates a
combination of pathogens as well as other pesticides
used in hives to control pests that afflict bees.
Will these insecticides harm other
insects?
All of the svstemic insecticides used to control EAB
will impact other species of insects that feed on
treated ash trees. However, ash trees that are not
treated will be killed bV EAB, which will also impact
these insects. Some products can affect manv kinds
of insects, while others affect onlV certain groups
of insects. For example, emamectin benzoate has
been shown to affect a broad range of plant-feeding
insects. Products with imidacloprid generally have
little effect on caterpillars, mites, and armored
scales, but will impact most sawflies, leaf-feeding
beetles, and sap-feeding.insects such as aphids and
soft scales. Studies have shown that beneficial insect
predators and parasitoids - such as lady beetles,
lacewings, and parasitic wasps - can be killed by
indirect exposure to imidacloprid through their
prev, or directlv by feeding on nectar from treated
plants. However, svstemic insecticides are generally
considered to have less impact on natural enemies
than broad-spectrum insecticides applied as foliar or
cover sprays.
3
Woodpeckers are important predators of overwintering
EAB larvae.
Will these insecticides harm
woodpeckers?
This is unlikely. Woodpeckers feed on live, mature
EAB iarvae, mostlv in late fall, winter and earlv
spring. Manv of these mature larvae overwinter
in the nonliving, outer bark where theV will not be
exposed to svstemic insecticides. Imidacloprid,
dinotefuran, and emamectin benzoate are much
more toxic to insects than to birds that have been
tested, and insecticide concentrations that have
been measured in treated trees are far below the
levels known to be toxic to birds. An EAB larva
that has been killed by insecticide will desiccate
quickly and decompose. There is little evidence
that woodpeckers will feed on larval cadavers.
Furthermore, living larvae that are suitable prev
for woodpeckers will not have been exposed to a
lethal dose of insecticide, and these products do not
bio-accumulate in animals in the way that fat-soluble
insecticides such as DOT do. In Michigan and Ohio,
where EAB has been established for several years,
manV ash trees have been treated with svstemic
insecticides. There nave been no reported cases
of woodpecker poisoning caused bV insecticides
applied for control of EAB.
Does injecting insecticides into
trunks injure the trees?
Drilling through the outer bark creates a wound in
the tree. The response of the tree to these wounds
is affected by factors such as the size and depth of
the hole and the vigor of the tree. In recent studies,
the injury associated with drilling holes and injecting
two insecticide products (Imicide@ applied with
Mauget@capsulesandTREE"age'" applied with the
ArborjetTree IV'" and Quickjet'") into trunks of ash
trees was examined. In nearlv all cases, ash trees
that were relative IV healthv and properlv injected
showed little evidence of damage. New, healthy
wood was produced over the injection sites and
there was no evidence of pathogen infection, decay,
or other signs of serious injury. Other devices used
to inject ash trees generate wounds that differ from
those caused bV driliing discrete holes in the tree.
However, their impact has not been thoroughlV
evaluated in research projects. We do know that
untreated ash trees in areas with EAB infestations
will eventually be killed.
Will treating ash trees result in
development of resistance of EAB
to insecticides?
This is highlV unlikely. Pests typicallv evolve
resistance to pesticides onlV in situations where
a high proportion of the insect population was
subjected to strong seiection pressure. For example,
pesticide resistance has evolved in insect and weed
populations in agricultural fieids, greenhouses,
and grain storage bins where nearlv all of the pest
population was exposed to the pesticide. Ash trees
are very common in many natural environments.
Landscape trees represent a small fraction of all
the ash that will be colonized bV EAB in a given
area, and onlV a small proportion of high-value
trees will ever be treated to control EAB. Thus,
most ofthe EAB population will never be exposed
to insecticides. Because the selection pressure is
so low, and there will be plentv of cross breeding
with individuals that have never been exposed to
insecticides, the risk of a resistant EAB population
evolving is minimal.
Acknowledgements
We thank the following for their comments and suggestions on a
previous draft of this bulletin: Nila Hines (Minnesota Department
of Agriculture), Daniel Kenny (Ohio Department of Agriculture),
Steven Katovich (USDA Forest Service), Vera Krischik (University
of Minnesota), Phillip Lewis (USDA Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service), Catherine Lindell (Michigan State University),
Therese Poland (USDA Forest Service), Daniel Potter (University
of Kentucky), Michael Raupp (University of Maryland), Paula
Shrewsbury (University of Maryland), Marla Spivak (University
of Minnesota), James Tew (The Ohio State University), Elliot
Tramer (University of Toledo), and Joseph Zachmann (Minnesota
Department of Agriculture). Responsibility for the content of this
document rests with the authors.
Information provided here is for educational purposes only. References to commercial products or trade names do not imply endorsement by the authors or their institutions.
The University of Minnesota Extension is an equal opportunity educator and employer. In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, this publication/material is available
in alternative formats upon direct request to the University of Minnesota Extension Store at 800.876.8636.
Ohio State University Extension embraces human diversity and is committed to ensuring that all research and related educational programs are available to clientele on a
nondiscriminatory basis without regard to race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, disability, or veteran status. This
statement is in accordance with United States Civil Rights Laws and the USDA. Keith L. Smith, Ph.D., Associate Vice President for Agricultural Administration and Director, Ohio
State University Extension. IDD No. 800.589.8292 (Ohio only) or 614.292-1868.
MSU is an affirmative.action, equal.opportunity employer. Michigan State University Extension programs and materials are open to all without regard to race, color, national
origin, gender, gender identity, religion, age, height, weight, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, marital status, family status or veteran status. Issued in furtherance of
4 MSU Extension work, aCts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Thomas G. Coon, Director, MSU Extension, East Lansing, M148824.
February 2011
Sierra Club Canada
'\t) SIERRA
CLUB
CANADA
Health & Environment
Pesticides
Safe Food and
Sustainable Agriculture
Taxies
Water
Environmental
Education
Protecting
Biodiversity
Atmosphere & Energy
Transition to a
Sustainable Economy
Sign up for SCC's e-
newsletter
IEmail
:Joinl
see >P.rq9rams >He~JtI:1,~,_E.mIiJQ!1ment > p~_~th:;::!g.e&_ > Imjdacloprid Fact
Sheet
Pesticide Fact Sheet
Imidacloprid
1-((6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl)-N-nitro-2-
imidazolidinimine
General
Imidacloprid is an insecticide which is the first insecticide of its chemical
family, neonicotinoids, which are modelled after nicotine, to be
registered for use. Common trade names include MeritT~, Admire™,
Gaucho™ and Advantage™.
How It Works
lmidacloprid fits-into the receptors meant to receive acetylcholine, which
carries nerve impulses from one nerve cell to another. By blocking these
acetylcholine receptors an excess of acetylcholine accumulates causing
paralysis and eventual death.
Acute Health Effects
Effects.of exposure.to imidacloprid include apathy,difficulty breathing,
loss of the ability to move,staggering, trembling and. spasms. Studies on
rats indicate that the thyroid is particularly sensitive to exposure of
imidacloprid causing thyroid.lesions.[1]
Chronic Health Effects
There are no publicly available chronic studies ofcommercial
imidacloprid products. This is of concern because the absence of proof
by no means indicates the absence of harm. Long term studies should
be completed ona pesticide before it comes onto the market and such
studies if they exist, they should be publicly available.
We do howeVer know that imidacloprid affects reproductionina variety
of ways. In pregnantrabbits, imidaclopridfed between the sixth and
eighteenth days of pregnancy caused an increase in the number of
miscarriages and an increase in the number of offspring with abnormal
skeletons.[2] lmidacloprid.exposed .rats.gave.birth to smaller offspring~
Environmental Effects - Wildlife
Imidacloprid is toxic to birds and wildlife and mildly toxic to fj~h.
lmidacloprid use has been linked to eggshell thinning in birds[3},
reduced egg production and reduced hatching success at exposures of
234ppm in food.[4] It is highly toxic to certain species including the
house sparrow[5], pigeon, canary and Japanese quailI6].
Environmental Effects ... Beneficial Insects
lmidacloprid is ;:in insecticide, so it is not surprising that it is toxic to
many beneficial. insects such as honey bees to which imidacloprid is
highly toxic.[7]lmidacloprid is acutely toxic to earthworms with an LD50
of between 2 and four parts per million in soil.[8] While extremely low
doses of O.2ppmand O.5ppm have. been shown to.cause deformed
Page I of3
Attachment 3
Campaigns
Take Action
Media
Links
Publications
mhtml:file://C:\Documents and Settings\asindt\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Co... 3/11/2011
Sierra Club Canada
Page 2 of 3
sperm[9]. and. DNA damage respectively.
Imidacloprid has shown to severely limit the mobility of lady beetles, [10]
as well asotherpredatory insects,such as marid bugs and lacewings.
[11] After marigolds were treated with the imidacloprid insecticide
Admire, to kill spider mites, spider mite damage increased because the
insect natural enemies of the spider mites were killed off by the
imidacloprid.[12]
The widespread use of imidaCloprid has been linked to colony collapse
disorder, a phenomenon described by beekeepers, researchers and
government officialS when entire hive populations seem to disappear,
apparently dying out. France has put restrictions on the use of
imidacloprid (GauchoT) since the 1990s over concerns for the bee
population.
Canada hasn't restricted use of the product despite warnings that similar
impacts on bees were being felt here.
Prince Edward Island beekeepers have reported serious losses of bees
which. they believe since 1995 is linked to residues from .imidacloprid.
Potatoes on. the island have-been treated with soil applications of
Admire (imidacloprid) to prevent Colorado potato beetle.)t is believed
that the rotational clover and canola crops have sublethal residues of
imidaclopridinthepollen and nectar which cause slow death of bees in
the colony.
Environmental. Effects - Water Contamination
Imidacloprid has a high potential of leaching into.groundwater. Although
its persistence varies from the shortest half life of 107 days to
concentrations which didn't begin to decline until over a year after use,
[13] there is little question about imidacloprid's tremendous ability to
move throughsoiL[14] Compared with 11 other popular pesticides
Imidacloprid moved more quickly through soil than any ofthe other
pesticides tested:[151 The other 10 pesticides tested includeddiazinon,
chlorpyrifos alid diuron which are widespread Water contaminants,[16]lt
is classified by the EPA in category las having the highest leaching
potential.
Inarts
Commerical imidacloprid, and.many.otherpesticides have inert
ingredients that do not undergo toxicity studies prior to the regulation of
the product, and little information is available. However, additives that
have been shown to be found in imidacloprid including: two proven
carcinogens crystalline quartz silica and naphthalene.[17l,[18]
Conclusions
Imidacloprid has been shown to cause acute health effects, including
spasms, and thyroid lesions. No chronic toxicity tests have been made
available to the public, but we do know that it has effects on mammalian
reproduction. The reproductive health of birds is also.affected.with
reduced egg production,. and egg thinning. It affects a multitude of
beneficial insects, as well as earthworms.
Endnotes
[1] Reference
U.S. EPA. Office of Pesticides. 1994. Toxoneliners: Imidacloprid. Washington,
D.C., Jan. 3, p. 1.
[2] U.S. EPA Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. 1993.
lmidacloprid.Evaluation of toxicity data submitted and identification of
outstanding toxicology data requirements.
mhtml:file:IIC:\Documents and Settings\asindt\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Co... 3/11/2011
Sierra Club Canada
Page 3 on
[3] U.S.EPA. Office of Pesticide Programs. 1994. Pesticide fact sheet:
lmidacloprid. Washington, D.C., Mar. 18.
[4J U.S. EPA. 1992. Data evaluatiOn record: NTN 33893 MRID NO.420553~13.
Washington, D.C., Aug. 24.
[5} U.S. EPA. Office of Pesticide Programs. 1994. Pesticide fact sheet:
Imidatloprid. Washington, D.C., Mar. .18.
[6] U.S.EPA Office of prevention, Pesticides and ToxicSubstances.1994.
Imidacloprid;acian:6{a) (2) submittals..Memo fromAF..Mciorowski, Ecological
Effects Branch, to D. Edwards, Registration Division, Washington, D.C;
[7] .5. EPA. Office of Pesticide Programs. 1994. Pesticide fact sheet:
Imidacloprid. Washington, D,C., Mar. 18.
[8] Zang, Y. at aL 2000; Genotoxicity of two novel pesticides on earthworm,
Eiseniafoetlda. Chemosphere39:2347 -2356.
[9] Zang, Y. et al. 2000. Genotoxicity of two novel pesticides on earthworm,
Eisenia foetida.Chemosphere39:2347 -2356.
[10] Smith, S.F. and VA Krischik.1999. Effects of systemic imidaclopridon
Coleomegilla maculate. Environmental Entimology. 28: 1189-1195.
[11] Mizell, RF. arid M.C.Sconyers. 1992. Toxicity of imidaclprid to selected
arthropod predators in the laboratory. Flor. Entomol. 75:277-280.
[12] Scalr, D.C., D. Gerace. And W.S. Canrshaw. 1998. Observations of
population increases and injury byspidet mites (Acati tetranychidae)Ori
ornamental plants treated with imidacloprid. Jour. OfEcon. Entomol. 91 :250-
255~
[13] Ref. #69,pp. 5-6 and attached pestiCideenvironmerital fate one line
summary.
[14]U.S EPA Environmental Fate and Groundwater Branch. 1993. EFGWB
review of imidacloprid. Washington, D.C. Jun 11, p. 3.
[15] Vollner, L. and D. Klotz. 1997. Leaching and degrqadation of pesticides in
groundWater layers. Environmental Behaviour of crop protectiori chemicals.
Vienna,.Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency:.Pp. 187~203.
[16] U.S. Geological Survey; 1999. The quality of out nation's waters~nutrients
and pesticides. Cicular 1225: Reston, VA:USGS. P. 60.
[17] International Agency for Research on Cancer. 1997. Silica.
http://193.51.164.11'1htdocs/MoriographsNoI68fSILlCA.HTM
[18] National Toxicology Program. Undated. Toxicology and carcinogenesis
studies of naphthalene (CAS No. 91-20-3) in F344/Nrats (inhalation studies).
TR-SOO.
Sierra Club of Canada National Office
info@$ierraclub.ca
HQme-Se.~rG.h ~ c.o.nta.cLU.s - E.ub.Uca.tiQJ)~, ~ Pr.Ograms - Ge.tJllY9lY,eo - Me!:lja - Ab.o.wl.U.s - C.l1aRters
mhtml:file:I/C:\Documents and Settings\asindt\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Co... 3/11/2011
JOURNA~ OF PESTICIDE REFORM/SPRING 2001' VOL. 21, NO.1
Attachment 4
. INSECTICIDE
IMIDACLOPRID
FACTSHEET
Imidacloprid is arelalivel, new, systemic insecticide chemically related to the tobacco toxin nicotine. Like nicotine,
it acts on the nervous system. Worldwide, it is considered lobe one of the insecticides used in the largest volume.
It has a wide diversity of uses: in agriculture, . on turf, on pets, and for household pests.
Symptoms of exposure to imidaclopridincludeapathy, labored breathing, incoordination, emaciation, and
convulsions. Longer-term exposures cause reduced ability to gain weight and thyroid lesions.
In studies 01 how imidacloprid allects reproduction, exposure 01 pregnant laboratory animals resulted in more
Irequent miscarriages and smaller ollspring.
An agricultural imidacloprid product increased the incidence 01 a kind of genetic damage called DNA adducts.
Imidacloprid is acutely toxic to some bird species, including sparrows, quail, canaries, and pigeons. Partridges have
been poisoned and killed by agricultural use 01 imidacloprid. It has also caused eggshell thinning.
The growth and size of shrimp are allected by imidacloprid concentrations of less than one part per billion (ppb).
Shrimp and crustaceans are killed by concentration of less than 60 ppb.
Irnidaclopi'id is persistent. In a field test in Minnesota, the concentration of imidaclopriddid not decrease for a year
following treatment. It is also mobile in soil, so is considered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to be a
potential water contaminant.
The development of resistance to imidacloprid by pest insects is a significant concern. In Michigan potato fields, the
Colorado potato beetle developed resistance to imidacloprid after just two years of use.
BY CAROLINE Cox
Imidacloprid (see Figure I) is a rela-
tively new insecticide, first registered for
use as a pesticide in the U.S. in 1994,
and was the first insecticide in its chemi-
cal class to be developed for commercial
use.1 Imidac10prid is a systemic insecti-
cide1; it moves through plants from the
place where it was applied and kills in-
sects when they feed. Its major manufac-
turer is. Bayer Corporation that markets
imidacloprid products with the brand
names Merit, Admire, Premise, Pre-Empt,
and Advantage, among others.2-6
Use
Although imidacloprid has not been
in use for long relative to other common
pesticides, according to . University.. of
.
Caroline Cox is NeAP's staff scientist
Figure 1
Imidacloprid
n
D""",,CH,- N'y' NH
I. II
~ N-NO,
CI
N
1-((6..chloro-3.pyridinyl)methyl)-N-nitro~2-
_ imidazolidinimine
Figure 2
Nicotine """" --CJ
07
N CH3
Imidacloprid and nicotine have similar activity
in the nervous system.
Arizona entomologist George Ware "very
possibly. it. is used. in the. greatest volume
globally of all insecticides."1Imidacloprid
has a wide variety. of uses; it is. used in
agricultural products for use on. cotton
and vegetable crops,3 in turfgrass and -or.,
namental plant products,2 in indoor arid
outdoor cockroach control products,S and
in termite control products.4 It is also
used in products for pets, home, lawn,
and garden .use including some, like pot-
ting soil, that may not always be easily
recognized as pesticides. 6,8-10
How Does Imidacloprid
Kill Insects?
Imidacloprid, and. other insecticides in
the nicotinoid.chemical family, are. "simi.,
lar. to and modeled after the natural nico.,
tine [a tobacco toxin]."1 (See Figure 2.)
Because of their molecular shape, size,
and charge, nicotine and nicotinoids fit
into receptor molecules in the . nervous
system that normally receive the molecule
acetylcholine. Acetylcholine carries nerve
impulses from one nerve. cell to another,
or from a herve cen.to the tissue.that a
NORTHWEST COALITION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO PESTICIDES/NCAP
P. O. BOX 1393. E U G ENE, 0 REG 0 N 97440 I (541) 3 4 4 - 5 044
15
JOURNAL OF PESTICIDE REFORM/SPRING 2001. VOL 21, NO.1
nerve controls. Imidacloprid and other
nicotinoids irreversibly block acetylcho-
line receptors.7
Why is imidacloprid less toxic to mam-
mals' nervous systems than to insects '7
Both insect and mammal nervous systems
have acetylcholine receptors that are
blocked by imidacloprid; most of the sen-
sitive receptors are in the central nervous
system of insects, but in nerves associ-
ated with muscles in mammals.7 How-
ever, insect acetylcholine receptors are
more sensitive to imidacloprid than are
mammalian receptors, 11 although for
some of imidacloprid's breakdown prod-
ucts this relationship is reversed.12
Inert Ingredients
Commercial imidacloprid insecticides,
like nearly all pesticides, contain ingredi-
ents other than imidacloprid called "inert"
or "other" ingredients. There is little pub-
licly available information about the iden-
tity of these ingredients. Inerts that have
been identified in imidacloprid products
include the following:
Crystalline quartz silica (in Merit 0.5
G13) is classified by the International
Agency for Research on Cancer as "car-
cinogenic to humans" 14 and as "known
to be a human carcinogen"15 by the Na-
tional Toxicology Program because it
causes lung cancer. It also causes emphy-
sema and obstructive airway disease and
has also caused genetic damage in exposed
people and laboratory tests.15
Naphthalene (in Leverage 2.716) has
recently been classified by the National
Toxicology Program as having" clear evi-
dence of carcinogenic activity"17 (through
inhalation exposure) because it causes na-
sal cancers. It also caused two kinds of
Figure 3
Persistence of Acute Neurological Symptoms Caused by
Imidacloprid and a Commercial Imidacloprid Product
12
10
~ B
0
w
0
0-
X
.
,\i 6
ro
w
~
ro 4
"
2
0
Imidac10prid
Gaucho
(imidacloprid + "inerf ingredients)
Sources:
U.S. EPA. Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances. 1992. Request for experimental use
permit 00315-EUP-ENG and 003125 EUP-ENR for NTN 33893 (Imidac1oprid-proposed) a
crystalline end-use formulation containing 0.62% NTN 33893 active ingredient. Memo from M.S.
Ottley, Health Effects Div., to D. Edwards, Registration Div. Washington, D.C., Mar. 24. (See
attached Data Evaluation Report for MRID No. 420553-31.)
U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. 1994. Imidac1oprid.
Evaluation of toxicity data submitted and identification of outstanding toxicology data
requirements. Memo from M.S. Ottley, Health Effects Div., to P. Jenkins and D. Edwards,
Registration Div. Washington, D.C., June 8. (See attached Data Evaluation Report for MRID No.
428557-02.
In laboratory tests, symptoms of exposure to a commercial. imidacloprid product lasted over
twice as long as symptoms of exposure to imidacloprid alone.
chromosome damage in laboratory tests.17
Other symptoms of naphthalene expo-
sure include anemia, liver damage, cata-
racts, and skin allergies. IS
Whenever possible, the remaining sec-
tions of this article will specify whether
tests were conducted with imidacloprid
alone or with an imidacloprid-contain-
ing product (imidacloprid plus inerts).
Toxicity of inerts to cats: An uniden-
tified inert ingredient in Advantage, an
imidacloprid flea insecticide applied as
drops on the back of a pet's neck, can be
toxic to kittens when applied above the
label rate. In laboratory tests, death, coma,
and incoordination were observed in kit-
tens receiving five times the recommended
dose of Advantage.19 Further experiments
showed that the toxicity was probably
caused by the inert present in the largest
amount.20 No publicly available studies
show the effects of smaller overdoses.
Vomiting, salivation, and depression were
also observed in cats fed Advantage or its
inert ingredients.21
Acute Toxicity
In laboratory animals, symptoms of
acute (short-term) oral exposure to imida-
cloprid included apathy, labored breath-
ing, loss of the ability to move, stagger-
ing, trembling, and spasms. Some symp-
toms lasted for five days following expo-
sure.22 Symptoms following acute expo-
sure to an agricultural imidacloprid prod-
uct (imidacloprid plus "inerts") included
reduced activity, incoordination, tremors,
diarrhea, and emaciation. Some symp-
toms lasted 12 days after exposure,23 twice
as long as the symptoms of exposure to
imidacloprid alone. (See Figure 3.) Symp-
toms following acute exposure to an
imidacloprid flea control product in-
cluded reduced activity, convulsions, and
labored breathing.24
Also in laboratory animals, symptoms
of breathing imidacloprid (for four hours)
included difficult breathing, loss of the
ability to move, and slight tremors. Symp-
toms of breathing two agricultural imida-
cloprid products were similar: incoordi-
nation, convulsions, reduced activity,
tremors, and salivation. Some symptoms
16
NORTHWEST COALITION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO PESTICIDES/NCAP
P.O. BOX 1393. EUGENE, OREGON 97440 I (541)344-5044
JOURNAL OF PESTICIDE REFORM/SPRING 2001. VOL. 21, NO.1
persisted two days after exposure.25
Eye Irritation: Several imidacloprid
products (Merit 0.5 G,26 Merit 75 WP.2
Premise 75,4 Provado Soiupak,27 and Ad-
vantage6) cause eye irritation.
Subchronic Toxicity
Subchronic (medium-term: 10-day)
exposure of rats to imidacloprid reduced
weight gain at a dose of 10 mglkg per
day.28
There are no publicly available sub-
chronic studies of commercial imida-
cloprid products.
Chronic Toxicity
Chronic (long-term: lifetime) feeding
studies with rats showed that the thyroid
is especially sensitive to imidacloprid.
Thyroid lesions were caused by doses of
17 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) of
body weight per day in males. Slightly
higher doses (25 mglkg per day) reduced
weight gain in females.29 At higher doses
(100 mglkg per day), effects included at-
rophy of the retina in females,30
There are no publicly available chronic
studies of commercial imidacloprid
products.
Effects on Reproduction
Imidacloprid affects reproduction in a
variety of ways. In pregnant rabbits,
imidacloprid fed between the sixth and
eighteenth days of pregnancy caused an
increase in the frequency of miscarriages
and an increase in the number of off-
spring with abnormal skeletons. These
effects were observed at a dose of 72 mg/
kg per day. In rats, a two generation feed-
ing study found that rats fed imidacloprid
gave birth to smaller offspring. Their
weight was reduced at a dose of 19 mgl
kg per day.31 (See Figure 4.)
There are no publicly available studies
of the effects of commercial imidac10prid
products on reproduction.
Mutagenicity
The tests of imidacloprid's ability to
cause genetic damage that were submit-
ted to the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EP A) as part of the registration
Figure 4
Effects of Imidacloprid Exposure on Successful Pregnancy
Weight of Newborn Offspring
Unexposed
Exposed
5.0
5.5
Weight of newborn rats (milligrams)
6.0
Frequency of miscarriages
Unexposed
Exposed
o
4 8
Miscarriages (% of total rabbit embryos)
12
Source:
U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. 1993. Imidacloprid.
Evaluation of toxicity data submitted and identification of outstanding toxicology data
requirements. Memo from M.S. Ottley, Health Effects Div., to P. Jenkins and D. Edwards,
Registration Div. Washington, D.C., Sept. 3. (See attached Data Evaluation Report for MRID
Nos. 42256340 and 422563-39.)
Imidacloprid exposure reduced birth weight 10 percent and doubled the number of miscarriages.
process found no evidence of genetic dam-
age, or evidence only at high exposures.}
However, a new technique that looks at
the ability of a chemical to cause genetic
damage by chemically binding to DNA
(the genetic material) found that the
imidacloprid insecticide Admire increased
the frequency of. this kind of damage.
DNA adducts (the binding of a chemical
to DNA) were five times more common
in calf thymus cells exposed to Admire
than in unexposed cells.32
Toxicity of Imidacloprid's
Metabolites
Several of imidacloprid' s breakdown
products (metabolites) can be toxic. One
metabolite found in imidacloprid-treated
plants, called the olefine metabolite, is
more toxic. to insects than imidac10prid
itself.33 Another metabolite, the desnitro
metabolite, has very little neIVOUS system
toxicity to insects33 but is more toxic than
imidacloprid itself in mammals' nelVous
systems,12 The soil metabolite 2-imida-
zolidone34 (also known as ethyleneurea)
induces tumors in combination with ni-
trate35 and causes genetic damage.36
Effects on Birds
Imidacloprid's acute toxicity to birds
varies widely among bird species. How-
ever, it is "highly toxic" I to certain spe-
cies including house sparrow,} Japanese
quail, canary, and pigeon.37 The median
lethal dose (LD 50: dose that kills half of a
NORTHWEST COALITION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO PESTICIDES/NeAP
P. O. BOX 1 393, E U G ENE, 0 REG 0 N 97440 I (54 1 ) 3 4 4 - 5 044
17
JOURNAL OF PESTICIDE REFORM/SPRING 2001. VOL. 21, NO.1
test population) for all these species is
less than 50 mg/kg1.37 Based on these
tests, EP A's Ecological Effects Branch
concluded that the agency's "levels of con-
cern" were exceeded for both non-
endangered and endangered songbirds.38
Imidacloprid causes abnormal behav-
ior at doses less than 1/5 that which causes
death. House sparrows fed a granular
imidacloprid product showed symptoms
of incoordination, lack of responsiveness,
and inability to fly at doses of 6 mg/kg.
At doses of 12 mg/kg diarrhea and im-
mobility were added to the observed
symptoms.39 Even birds for whom
imidacloprid is not highly toxic, mallard
ducks for example, show these symptoms.
Symptoms were observed in mallards at
all imidacloprid doses used in tests sub-
mitted to EP A as part of the registration
process.40
Other problems caused by imida-
cloprid in birds include eggshell thinning
(at exposures of 61 mg/kg).l decreased
weight (at exposures of 150 ppm in
food),41 and reduced egg production and
hatching success (at exposures of 234 ppm
in food). 42
French veterinarians have found dead
and poisoned partridges in agricultural
fields following use of imidacloprid-
treated seed and verified that the birds'
symptoms matched those caused by
imidacloprid. Imidacloprid residues were
found in the crop, gizzard, and liver of
these birds.43
Effects on Fish
Imidacloprid is acutely toxic to adult
fish at relatively high concentrations (over
80 ppm). Juvenile flsh, however are con-
siderably more susceptible. Survival of
rainbow trout fry, as well as their weight,
was reduced at the lowest imidacloprid
concentration tested (1.2 ppm). There-
fore it was not possible to determine the
lowest concentration that did not cause
adverse effects.44
Figure 5
Effect of Low Concentrations of Imidacloprid on Shrimp
Length Weight
7.5 1.0
. ~
" 0
. .
0 0
Q, Q, .8
x x
. .
'0 '0
. ~
,.. 7.0
. .
"" "" .6
'" '"
N N
IE ;/l
"
. .
E c; .4
5 5
~ 6.5 :E
C. ~
c '0
-" .
Q, Q, .2
E E
.C .C
~ ~
en en
6.0 0
Unexposed Exposed Unexposed Exposed
(.3 ppb) (.3 ppb)
Source:
U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention and Toxic Substances. 1992. NTN 33893 ecological effects
data, response to Miles Inc.'s request to upgrade four aquatic studies. Memo from D. Urban,
Ecological Effects Branch, to D. Edwards, Registration Div. Washington, D.C., Aug. 25.
Imidacloprid concentrations of 0.3 ppb reduced growth of mysid shrimp, an important source of
food for many saltwater fish species.
Effects on Other
Aquatic Animals
Imidacloprid is toxic at extremely low
concentrations to some species of aquatic
animals. The following species have been
studied as representatives of aquatic ani-
mals in general:
. The LC50 for the widespread freshwater
crustacean HyalelIa azteca is 55 ppb,
classified by EP A as very highty toxic.
Some mortality was recorded at a con-
centration of less than 1 ppb.4S
. Irnidacloprid's LCso for the estuary
crustacean Mysidopsis bahia is 37 ppb.
Behavioral effects occurred in those ani-
mals that survived exposure: lethargy
and loss of equilibrium.46 The LC50
for an agricultural imidacloprid prod-
uct was similar and EP A also classified
it as very highly toxic.47 Sublethal
effects on mysid shrimp occurred at
startling low concentrations: length,
growth, and production of offspring
were all reduced at concentrations less
than 1 ppb48 (See Figure 5.) Mysid
shrimp occupy "an important position
in near shore food webs. They consti-
tute a major source of food for many
fish species...." In addition, "indirect
effects to waterfowl may be expected if
the mysid population, or 'similar
organisms, is depleted. "49
. A study of artificial ponds found that
the number of invertebrate species and
their abundance was reduced at con-
centrations of 5 ppb. so
Effects on Earthworms
Earthworms are an important part of
the soil ecosystem. In a typical soil, about
80 percent of the animals, by weight, are
earthworms. They make important con-
tributions to soil fertility and the break-
down of organic material. Sl
Imidacloprid is acutely toxic to earth-
worms; for example, the LCso of the spe-
cies Eisenia fetida is between 2 and 4 ppm
in soil.S1
At lower concentrations, other effects
occur. The activity of the enzyme cellu-
lase, which is found in the earthworm's
gut and allows it to break down plant
18
NORTHWEST COALITION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO PESTICIDES/NCAP
P. O. BOX 1393, E U G ENE, 0 REG 0 N 97440 I (541) 344 ~ 5 0 4 4
JOURNAL OF PESTICIDE REFORM/SPRING 2001 . VOL. 21, NO.1
litter, is reduced by imidadoprid con-
centrations of 0.2 ppm.52 The frequency
of deformed sperm in earthworms was
increased by a soil concentration of 0.2
ppm. (See Figure 6.) The frequency of
damaged DNA (genetic material) in
earthworms was increased by a concen-
tration of 0.05 ppm.51
Effects on Beneficial Insects
Since imidacloprid is an insecticide, it
is not surprising that it is toxic to benefi-
cial insects, those that. provide an eco-
nomic benefit to agriculture. Examples
include the following:
. Imidadoprid is highly toxic to honey
bees.l
. Lab tests indicated that no adults and
only 10 percent of juvenile spiny sol-
dier bugs (a predator of potato beetle,
corn earworm, and other pests) would
survive a typical application of
imidacloprid.53
. Treatment of vegetable crops with the
imidac10prid insecticide Provado re-
duced parasitoids of whiteflies between
35 and 50 percent. 54
. Treatment of marigolds (with the
imidacloprid insecticide Admire) or
honeylocust trees (with the
imidac10prid insecticide Merit) in-
creased spider mite damage on both
species because the insect natural-en-
emies of the spider mites were killed
by the imidacloprid.55 A similar resur-
gence of spider mites occurred in egg-
plant treated with imidac10prid granules
at planting.56
. Soil treatment of sunflowers, chrysan-
themums, and dandelions with imida-
cloprld granules (Marathon) caused a
decrease in the ability of lady beetles
(predators) on the plants to move. 57
. An imidacloprid insecticide was acutely
toxic to a variety of predatory insects
in laboratory tests: mirid bugs, lady beetles
(adult and larvae), and lacewings. 58
Effects on Cats
A British veterinarian reported that a
cat (that was atready ill with cancer) de-
veloped a severe skin rash following treat-
ment with Advantage. The rash, centered
Figure 6
Imidacloprid and Sperm
Deformities in Earthworms
8
_6
~
imidacloprid in their food monitoring
programs.65.66 There are two published
imidacloprid monitoring studies from
Spain. One found imidacloprid residues
in all samples of greenhouse vegetables
tested one week after treatment.67 The
other found imidacloprid in tomatoes,
peppers, potatoes, carrots, eggplant, pears,
and melons; 21 percent of the samples
were contaminated.68
Water Contamination
Imidacloprid, according to EP A. "has
the potential to leach to ground water.
In addition, high solubility and mobility
are concerns for transport to surface wa-
ter by dissolved runoff, "69 Details about
these concerns include the following:
. Persistence of imidacloprid varies
among sites in tests submitted as part
of its registrations, but is always sig-
nificant. The shortest half-life (the
amount of time required for half of an
applied pesticide to break down or
move away from the test site) was 107
days in turf-covered soil in Georgia.
The longest half-life was in Minnesota
where the imidadoprid concentration
in cornfield soil did not decline for one
year after treatment.70 (See Figure 7
for additional data.)
. Imidac1oprid's ability to move in soil69
has been demonstrated by a variety of
studies, In a laboratory test, imida-
c10prid leached more quickly through
soil columns than the other 11 pesti-
cides tested,71 Some of the other pesti-
cides included in this study, diazinon,
chlorpyrifos, and diuron, are wide-
spread water contaminants.72 EP A
modeled the relative leaching potential
of 14 turf insecticides; imidacloprid was
in category I, pesticides with highest
leaching potential. 73 When applied In
a hop field drip irrigation system,
imidacloprid moved to the maximum
depth tested (!O5 cm) within 7 days
after application. 74 (This represents a
high-leaching scenario, as the soil was
irrigated daily, but is a good example
of imidacloprid's mobility in soil.)
Despite the concern raised by these
studies that imidacloprid will contami-
NORTHWEST COALITION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO PESTICIDES/NCAP
P. O. BOX 1393. E U G ENE, 0 REG 0 N 97440 I (541) 3 4 4 - 5 044
E
.
c.
. 4
~
.
E
~
" 2
o
unexposed 0.1
0.2
0.5
(imidacloprid in soil, parts per million)
Source:
Luo, Y. 1999. Toxicological study of two
novel pesticides on earthworm, Eisenia
(oetida. Chemosphere 39:2347-2356.
Exposure to imidac1oprh;1 increases the fre-
quency of deformed sperm in earthworms.
at the spot where the imidacloprid was
applied, caused intestinal problems and
heart failure, leading to death. 59
Effects on Plants
Although it is perhaps surprising for
an insecticide, imidacloprid can be toxic
to plants. For example, lemon seedlings
growing in a greenhouse were damaged by
trunk treatments with an imidacloprid in-
secticide,60 and cauliflower seedlings were
damaged by root drench and soil treat-
ments.61 In addition, a Polish researcher
reported that treatment of peas with the
imidacloprid insecticide Gaucho increased
the incidence of Fusarium root rot.62
Also, an imidacloprid insecticide de-
creased growth of blue-green algae and
diatoms at moderate concentrations (9-
33 ppm).63.64
Food Contamination
Little monitoring of imidacloprid in
food crops is publicly available. The U.S.
Department of Agriculture and the Food
and Drug Administration do-not include
19
JOURNAL OF PESTICIDE REFORM/SPRING 2001' VOL. 21, NO.1
Figure 7
Persistence of Imidacloprid in Soil in Three States
Note:
Length of bar is proportional to the soil half-
life, in days. Half-life is the length of time
required for half of the applied imidacloprid
to break down or move away from the
application site.
Source:
U.S. EPA. Environmental Fate and Groundwater Branch. 1993. EFGWB review of
imidacloprld. Washington, D.C., Jun 11. Pp. 5-6 and attached pesticide environmental fate one
line summary.
Imidacloprid is persistent in soil. In some studies, over half of the applied imidacloprid is still
present one year after application.
nate water. EPA did not classify imida-
cloprid as a restricted use product in or-
der to protect water quality.75 EPA ex-
plained their actions this way: "We are
not recommending that the turf and or-
namental products be classified as re-
stricted use products due to ground wa-
ter concerns for several reasons. First, sev-
eral of the proposed NTN products con-
tain directions for use around the home
and a Restricted Use Classification would
not allow sale of these products to the
homeowner, Second, professional lawn
care companies will be users of these prod-
ucts and they will not use a Restricted
Use Product. "76 Thus, the decision was
an economic one, not a scientific one.
Resistance
The development of resistance to
imidacloprid in pest species appears to
be a serious concern, In Michigan,
imidacloprid resistance in the Colorado
potato beetle was documented following
two years of imidacloprid use on pota-
toes. (In both years, over 80 percent of
the potato. acreage was treated with
imictacloprid.)77 In laboratory experi-
ments, thrips selected for their resistance
to the organophosphate insecticide
diazinon were also resistant to imida-
cloprid.78 This situation, in which resis-
tance to one insecticide confers resistance
to another insecticide, is called cross-re-
sistance and is "especially disconcerting "78
to the University of Missouri researchers
who conducted the study, ..,.
References
1. U.s. EPA. Office of Pesticide Programs. 1994.
Pesticide fact sheet: lmidacloprid. Washington,
D.C., Mar. 18.
2. Bayer Corporation. 2000. Merit@75 WP. Speci-
men label. Kansas City MO, May 18. htlp://pro-
tect-your-turf.com.
3. Bayer Corporation. 1999. Admire@ 2 Flowable.
Specimen label. Kansas City MO, Aug. 3. http://
uscrop.bayer.com.
4. Bayer Corporation. 1999. Premise@) 75. Speci-
men label. Kansas City MO, Jan. 4. http://
usagrLbayer.com.
5. Bayer Corp. 1999. Pre_Empt™. Specimen la-
bel. Kansas City MO, Apr. 19. http://
usagrLbayer.com.
6. Bayer Corp. 1999. Advantage@. Specimen la-
bel. Shawnee Mission, Kansas 66201 MO, Jan.
4. http://www.n.ofleas.com.
7. Ware, G.W. The pesticide book. Fresno CA:
Thoms.on Publications. Pp. 68, 180-184.
8. Bayer-Pursell, LLC. Undated. Bayer Advanced Gar-
den product guide. www.BayerAdvanced.c.om.
9. Calif.ornia Dept. of Pesticide Regulati.on. 2000.
Database entry for Bayer Advanced Garden 2-
in-1 Plant Spikes Fertilizer + Insecticide 8-11-5
Ready-to-Use, Feb. 13. www.cdpr..ca.gov/docs/
label/prodnam.htm.
10. Calif.ornia Dept. of Pesticide Regulation. 2000.
Database entry f.or Bayer Advanced Lawn Sea-
son-Long Grub C.ontrol Ready-to-Use, Feb. 13.
www.cdpr.ca.g.ov/docs/labelfprodnam.htm.
11. Zwart, R., M. Oortgiessen, and H.P.M. Vljver-
berg. 1994. Nitromethylene heter.ocycles: Se-
lective agonists of nicotinic recept.ors In l.ocust
neurons compared to m.ouse N1E-115 and
BC3H1 cells. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 48:202-
213.
12. Tomizawa, M. and J.E. Casida. 1999. Minor
structural changes in nic.otinoid insecticides con-
fer differential subtype selectivity for mamma-
lian nicotinic acetylch.oline receptors. Brit. J.
Pharmacol.127:115-122.
13. Bayer Corp. 1994. Material safety data sheet:
Merit 0.5 G Insecticide. Kansas City, MO, Sept.
23.
14. Internati.onal Agency for Research .on Cancer.
1997. Silica. http://193.51.164.11/hldocs/Mono-
graphsNoI68/SILlCA.HTM.
15. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services. Pub-
lic Health Service. National Toxicology Program.
2000. Ninth Rep.ort on Carcinogens. http://
ehis. niehs.n ih.gov/roc/toc9. html.
16. Bayer Corp. 1994. Material safety data sheet:
Leverage. Kansas City, MO, Sept.
17. National Toxicology Program. Undated. Toxicol-
ogy and carcin.ogenesis studies of naphthalene
(CAS No. 91-20-3) in F344/N rats (inhalation
studies). TR-500. http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.g.ov/
htdocs/L T-studiesITR500.html.
18. Acros Organics. 1999. Material safety data sheet:
Naphthalene, 99%. Fair Lawn, NJ.
www.fishersci.com.
19. Bayer Corp. Agricultural Div. 1996. Letter from
T. McNamara, biochemistry and pesticides reg-
istration manager, to U.S. EPA Office of Pesti-
cide Programs, 6(a){2) document processing
desk, June 17.
20. Bayer Corp. Agricultural Div. 1996. General
safety evaluation for t.opical use of imidacloprid
{Advantage™) Sp.ot-On.on six week old kittens.
Shawnee Missi.on, KS, Aug. 20.
21. Bayer Corp. Agricultural Div. 1996. Acute oral
toxicity evaluati.on .of imidacloprld (Advantage TM)
in cats. Shawnee Mission, KS, Nov. 11.
22. U.S. EPA. Office of Pesticides and Toxic Sub-
stances. 1992. Request for experimental use per-
mit 00315-EUP-ENG and 003125 EUP-ENR for
NTN 33893 (Imidacloprid-proposed) a crystal-
line end-use formulati.on c.ontaining 0.62% NTN
33893 active ingredient. Memo from M.S. Ottley,
Health Effects Div., t.o D. Edwards, Registration
Div. Washington, D.C., Mar. 24. (See attached
Data Evaluation Report for MRID No. 420553-
31.)
23. U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances. 1994. Imidacloprid. Evalua-
20
NORTHWEST COALITION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO PESTICIDESINCAP
P. O. BOX 1 393, E U G ENE. 0 REG 0 N 97440 I (541) 3 4 4 - 5 0 4 4
JOURNAL OF PESTICIDE REFORM/SPRING 2001' VOL. 21, NO.1
tion of toxicity data submitted and identification
of outstanding toxicology data requirements.
Memo from M.S. Ottley, Health Effects Div., .to
P. Jenkins and D. Edwards, Registration Div.
Washington, D.C., June 8. (See attached Data
Evaluation Report for MRID No. 428557-02.)
24. U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances. 1996. Imidacloprid. Evalua-
tion of product labeling data submitted and iden-
tification of outstanding toxicology data require-
ments. Memo from M.S. Ollley, Health Effects
. Div., to P. Jenkins and D. Edwards, Registra-
tion Div. Washington, D.C., Mar. 5. p. 6.
25. Ref. # 23. (See p. 5 and attached Data Evalua-
tion Report for MRID No. 428557-04.)
26. Bayer Corp. 1998. Merit@ 0.5 G. Specimen la-
bel. Kansas City MO, Sept. 30. http://protect-
your-turf.com.
27. Bayer Corp. Undated. Provado@Solupak. Speci-
men label. Kansas City MO. http://
uscrop.bayer.com.
28. U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances. 1993. Imidacloprid. Evalua-
tion of toxicity data submitted and identification
of outstanding toxicology data requirements.
Memo from M.S. Ottley, Health Effects Div., to
P. Jenkins and D. Edwards, Registration Div.
Washington, D.C., Sept. 3. p. 8.
29. U.S. EPA. Office of Pesticides. 1994. Tox
oneliners: lmidacloprid. Washington, D.C., Jan.
3. p.1.
30. U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances. 1993. Imidacloprid. Evalua-
tion of toxicity data submitted and identification
of outstanding toxicology data requirements.
Memo from M.S. Ottley, Health Effects Div., to
P. Jenkins and D. Edwards, Registration Div.
Washington, D.C., Jan. 11. (See attached Data
Evaluation Report for MRID Nos. 422563-31 and
422563-32.)
31. Ref. # 28. See attached Data Evaluation Report
for MRID Nos. 422563-40 and 422563-39.
32. Shah, R.G. et al. 1997. Determination of
genotoxicity of the metabolites of the pesticides
Guthion, Sencor, Lorox, Reglone, Daconil, and
Admire by 32P-posllabeling. Mo!. Cell. Biochem.
169:177-184.
33. Nauen, R. et al. Efficacy of plant metabolites of
imidacloprid against Myzus persicae and Aphis
gossypii (Homoptera: Aphididae). Pestic. Sci.
52:53-57.
34. Rouchaud, J., F. Gustin, and A. Wauters. 1996.
Imidac!oprid insecticide soil metabolism in sugar
beet field crops. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxico!.
56:29-36.
35. Sander, J. and Buerkle, G. 1971. Induction of
malignant tumors in rats by oral administration
of 2-imidazolidinone and nitrite. Z. Krebsforsch
75(4):301-304. (Abstract.)
36. Szegedi, M. 1983. Comparative mutagenic in-
vestigation of the decomposition products of
alkylene bis(dithiocarbamate) fungicides and
Neviram 80WP. Nehezvegyip. Kut. Intez. Kozl.
14:37-51. (Abstract.)
37. U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances. 1994? Imidacloprid, avian
6(a)(2) submittals. Memo from A.F. Maciorowski,
Ecological Effects Branch, to D. Edwards, Reg-
istration Div. Washington, D.C.
38. U.S. EPA. 1993. Ecological effects preliminary
review. NTN 33893-2 systemic insecticide.
Washington, D.C., Feb. 5.
39. U.S. EPA. 1992. Data evaluation record: NTN
33893. MRID No. 420553-09. Washington, D.C.,
Mar. 27.
40. Bayer Corp. Agriculture Div. 1996. NTN 33893
technical: An acute oral LDso with mallards.
440594-01. Stilwell, KS, June 20.
41. U.S. EPA. 1992. Data evaluation record: NTN
33893. MRID No. 420553-11. Washington, D.C.,
Mar. 27.
42. U.S. EPA. 1992. Data evaluation record: NTN
33893. MRID No. 420553-13. Washington, D.C.,
Aug. 24.
43. Berny, P.J. et a!. 1999. Evaluation of the toxicity
of imidacloprid in wild birds. A new high perfor-
mance thin layer chromatography method for the
analysis of liver and crop samples in suspected
poisoning cases. J. Liq. Chrom. & ReI. Technol.
22:1547-1559.
44. U.S. EPA. 1992. Addendum: Data evaluation
record. MRID Nos. 420553-20 ar;ld 424805~01.
Washington, D.C.
45. U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances. 1992. NTN 33893 (imida-
c1oprid), data evaluation records. Memo from
A.F. Maciorowski, Ecological Effects Branch, to
D. Edwards, Registration Div. Washington, D.C.,
Dec. 22. (See attached Data Evaluation Report
for MRID Nos. 422563-03.)
46. U.S. EPA. 1992. Data evaluation record: NTN
33893. MRID No. 420553-19. Washington, D.C.,
Mar. 27.
47. U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention and Toxic Sub-
stances. 1993. NTN 33893 240 FS formulation
acute Mysid study. Memo from A.F. Maciorowskl,
Ecological Effects Branch, to D. Edwards, Reg-
istration Div. Washington, D.C., Feb. 9. (See
attached Data Evaluation Report for MRID No.
425283-01.)
48. U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention and Toxic Sub-
stances. 1992. NTN 33893 ecological effects
data, response to Miles Inc.'s request to up-
grade four aquatic studies. Memo from D. Ur-
ban, Ecological Effects Branch, to D. Edwards,
Registration Div. Washington, D.C., Aug. 25.
49. U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention and Toxic Sub-
stances. 1993. Reconsideration of non-food use
risk assessments for NTN 33893 [2.5% granu-
lar, 0.62% granular, NTN 33893-2 flowable].
Memo from A.F. Maciorowski, Ecological Effects
Branch, to D. Edwards, Registration Div. Wash-
ington, D.C., May 6.
50. U.S. EPA. Office of Prevention and Toxic Sub-
stances. 1993. Screen of the NTN 33893 micro-
cosm study. Memo from A.F. Maciorowski, Eco-
logical Effects Branch, to D. Edwards, Registra-
tion Div. Washington, D.C., Apr. 19. p. 10.
51. Zang, Y. et al. 2000. Genotoxicity of two novel
pesticides for the earthworm, Eisenia fetida.
Environ. Pollut. 108:271-278.
52. Luo, Y. 1999. Toxicological study of two novel
pesticides on earthworm, Eisenia foeOda.
Chemosphere 39:2347-2356.
53. De Cock, A. et al. 1996. Toxicity of diafenthiuron
and imidacloprid to the predatory bug Podisus
maculiventris (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae).
Environ. Entomo/. 25:476-480.
54. Simmons, AM. and D.M. Jackson. 2000. Evalu-
ation of foliar-applied insecticides on abundance
of parasitoids of Bemesia argentifolii (Homoptera:
Aleyrodidae) in vegetables. J. Entomo!. Sci. 35:1-
8.
55. Sclar, D.C., D. Gerace. and W.S. Cranshaw.
1998. Observations of population increases and
injury by spider mites (Acari: Tetranychidae) on
ornamental plants treated with imidacloprid. J.
Econ. Entomol. 91 :250-255.
56. Nemoto, H. 1995. Pest management systems
for eggplant arthropods: A plan to control pest
resurgence resulting from the destruction of natu-
ral enemies. JARQ 29:25-29.
57. Smith, S.F. and VA Krischik. 1999. Effects of
systemic imidacloprid on Coleomegilla maculata
(Coleoptera: Coccinellldae). Environ. Entomol.
28: 1189-1195.
58. Mizell, RF. and M.C. Sconyers. 1992. Toxicity
of imidacloprld to selected arthropod predators
in the laboratory. Flor. Entomol. 75:277-280.
59. Godfrey, D.R 1999. Dermatosis and associated
systemic signs in a cat with thymoma and re-
cently treated with an imidacloprid preparation.
J. Small Anim. Pract. 40:333-337.
60. Bullock, RC. and RR Pelosi. 1993. Toxicity of
imidacloprid to selected arthropods in the citrus
greenhouse and grove. Proc. Fla. State Hort.
Soc. 106: 42-47.
61. Natwick, E.T., J.C. Palumbo, and C.E. Engle.
1996. Effects of imidacloprld on colonization of
aphidS and sllverleaf whitefly and growth, yield
and phytotoxicity in cauliflower. Southwest.
Entomol. 21 :283-292.
62. Burgiel, Z.J. 1998. Effects of some pesticides
on the healthiness of pea. Chem. fnz. Ekol.
5:553-562. (Abstract.)
63. Bayer Corp. Agriculture Division. 1996. Toxicity
of NTN 33893 2F to the blue-green algae Ana-
baena flos-aquae. Kansas City MO, Dec. 3.
64. Bayer Corporation. Agriculture Division. 1996.
Toxicity of NTN 33893 2F to the freshwater dia-
tom Navicula peJ/iculosa. Kansas City MO, Dec.
2.
65. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. Agricultural Marketing
Service. Science and Technology. 2001. Pesti-
cide data program: Annual summary calendar
year 1999. Appendix E.
66. U.S. Food and Drug Admin. Undated. Food and
Drug Administration Pesticide Program: Residue
monitoring 1999. Washington, D.C. http://
vm.cfsan.fda.gov{-dmsJpesrpts.html. Table 3.
67. Fernandez-Alba, A.R. et al. 1996. Determina-
tion of imidacloprid in vegetables by high-per-
formance liquid chromatography with diode-ar-
ray detection. J. Chromatogr. A 721:97-105.
68. Fernandez-Alba, A.R. et al. 2000. Determina-
tion of imidacloprid and benzimidizole residues
in fruits and vegetables by liquid chromatogra-
phy-mass spectrometry after ethyl acetate multi-
residue extraction. J. AOAC Intern. 83:748-755.
69. U.S. EPA Environmental Fate and Groundwa-
ter Branch. 1993. EFGWB review of imidacloprid.
Washington, D.C., Jun 11. p. 3.
70. Ref. #69, pp. 5-6 and attached pesticide envi-
ronmental fate one line summary.
71. Vollner,. L. and D. Klotz. 1997. Leaching and
degradation of pesticides in groundwater layers.
In Environmental behaviour of crop protection
chemicals. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic
Energy Agency. Pp. 187-203.
72. U.S. Geological Survey. 1999. The quality of
our nation's waters-nutrients and pesticides.
Circular 1225. Reston VA: USGS. p. 60.
73. U.S. EPA. 1993. Comparison of the leaching
potential of imidacloprid (NTN) to other turf in-
secticides considered in the .preliminary turf
cluster assessment. Memo from J. Wolf, soil sci-
entist, to H. Jacoby, chief. Washington, D.C.,
June 15.
74. Felsot, AS., et a!. 1998. Distribution of imida-
cloprid in soil following subsurface drip
chemigation. BuJ/. Environ. Contam. Toxicol.
60:363-370.
75. U.S. EPA. 2000. Office of Pesticide Programs.
Restricted use products (RUP) report. Washing-
ton, D.C., Oct. www.epa.gov/RestProd/
rupoctOO.htm.
76. U.S. EPA. 1994. Registration for imidacloprid
(NTN 33893). Memo from S.J. Johnson, Regis-
tration Div., to D.O. CampI, Office of Pesticide
Programs. Washington, D.C., Mar. 10.
77. Grafius, E.J. and B.A. Bishop. 1996. Resistance
to imidacloprid in Colorado potato beetles from
Michigan. Res. Pest Manage. 8:21-26.
78. Zhao, G. et al. 1995. Insecticide resistance in
field and laboratory strains of western flower
thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae). J. Econ.
Entomol.88:1164-1170.
NORTHWEST COALITION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO PESTICIDES/NCAP
P. O. BOX 1393, E U G ENE. 0 REG 0 N 97440 I (541) 3 4 4 - 5 044
21
Agenda Item 6.b.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Shann Finwall, AICP, Environmental Planner
2011 Goals -Implementation Strategies
March 11, 2011 for the March 21 Commission Meeting
INTRODUCTION
On January 13, 2011, the Environmental and Natural Resources (ENR) Commission held a goal
setting meeting. During the meeting the commission chose to carry over the 2010 goals for
continued implementation in 2011 including greenways, neighborhood environmental groups, and
trash hauling. In addition, the commission wants to increase environmental public outreach efforts
and continue work on the wetland, shoreland, slope, and Mississippi Critical Area regulations in
2011. This memorandum will review options for implementing the 2011 goals.
DISCUSSION
Status of Goals
1. Greenways: The greenwaYs subcommittee began planning for programming in the
HollowaylBeaver Creek Greenway. This greenway was chosen because of the natural
resource projects which will take place in the greenway in 2011.
The subcommittee scheduled a greenway neighborhood event for Saturday, May 14, 2011,
at Hill Murray High School (which is located in the HollowaylBeaver Creek Greenway). The
subcommittee will invite all residents living in or near the greenway to the event, which will
include a presentation on basic greenwaY concepts and the ecology of the HollowaylBeaver
Creek Greenway, as well as a bus tour to view successes and challenges in the greenway.
The subcommittee also began designing a greenway brochure which will give an overview
of greenways and include maps and photographs specific to each greenway.
2. Neighborhood Environmental Groups: The neighborhood environmental subcommittee was
formed to look at ways to support neighborhoods in taking action to improve their
environment. In 2010 the subcommittee focused on energy efficiency and conservation by
partnering with Metro Clean Energy Resource Team and Xcel Energy to present an energy
efficiency workshop. During the workshop energy experts gave a presentation on simple
ways to save money and energy in homes and discussed energy efficiency programs and
rebates offered by Xcel Energy. The energy workshop was a good start to engaging
residents in the energy and neighborhood environmental group dialogue.
During the last subcommittee meeting, the group discussed expanding efforts into other
environmental areas. One idea includes working with the greenways subcommittee to
focus on environmental neighborhood programs going on in the Holloway/Beaver Creek
Neighborhood in 2011.
Additionally, the subcommittee will have an opportunity to discuss their neighborhood
environmental group efforts during the March 2011 Spotlight on Maplewood cable show.
During the show the city will spotlight energy efficiency and conservation goals and
objectives. The subcommittee will be interviewed on ways neighbors can join together to
improve energy efficiency in their homes and the community as a whole.
3. Trash Hauling: The trash hauling subcommittee attended city council workshops to testify
on the research and findings of organized versus open systems of trash hauling. The
subcommittee also assisted with public education by appearing in the Spotlight on
Maplewood cable show in August 2010 that highlighted goals and objectives for reviewing
the city's current open system of trash hauling.
The city council held a workshop on the matter on February 7, 2011, to continue the trash
hauling discussion. During the workshop the city council directed staff to place the item on
their February 28, 2011, city council agenda to set a public hearing date for the adoption of
a resolution of intent to organize. The tentative date for that public hearing is March 28,
2011.
If the city council adopts the resolution, the planning process will begin. State statute
requires that the city follow a statutory process for organizing collection systems, which
could take 120 days to one year to complete. Throughout the process the trash hauling
subcommittee will be called on to assist staff and the city council on the review and
planning for an alternative collection system.
Events
During the goal setting meeting the commission stated they would like to place more emphasis on
environmental public outreach in 2011. To achieve this, the commission has agreed to review a
calendar of events, and request that commissioners sign up to assist staff in the planning and
participation of the event. Following are events to consider for participation:
Calendar Year - 2011
April
. g (Saturday): Maplewood Park Clean Up
. 30 (Saturday): Spring Clean Up
May
. 7 (Saturday): Rain BarrellCompost Bin
Sales
. 7 (Saturday): TreemendouslArbor Day
Event
. 14 (Saturday): Greenway
PresentationlBus Tour
. 21 (Saturday): Waterfest
June
. 11 (Saturday): National Get Outdoors
Day
RECOMMENDATION
July
. 13-17 (Wed. - Sun.): Ramsey Co. Fair
August
. 2 (Tuesday): National Night Out
. 19 and 20? (Fri.lSat.) - Taste of
Maplewood
September
. End of Sept. (Saturday): Friends of
Maplewood Nature Annual Picnic
October
. 15 or 22 (Saturday): Fall Clean Up
. End of Oct., Beginning of Nov.
(Saturday): Public Buckthorn Removal
Event
Review the 2011 goals and determine how best to implement them throughout the year. If the
ENR Commission chooses to continue implementation of these goals through subcommittees,
commissioners should determine if the same or new commissioners are appointed to each
subcommittee. If no subcommittees are planned, the existing subcommittees should be disbanded
as recommended in the Commission Handbook.
ge,
2011 GREEN Yards
For Sustainable Cities
mJ""~' ,,~n!tfMill/f1li1
"'JJi!~. -01 g;"" l'f if
~' l~,"''-!."ilih
,. . ,
:1'0' A tiu_Iainable lIInplewocd " nonh St. 'Pool
Register for these prize drawings at each GREEN Yard Event you attend:
. GREEN Gift Certificates from Linder's (Drawing at GREEN Garden Tour, May 24th)
. Free Rainbarrel InstaIIation* at your home (Drawing at Tree-mendous, May 7th)
Okbntihrg
Mlr~
M~
(i_:tt'tIIttI;ffl/rtfNfJtU'.u.~
GREEN YARD Events and PRIZES
Attend these events to learn about greener landscaping practices,
*Only Maplewood and North St Paul residents who attend GREEN events qualify for rainbarrel installations,
Mow-Hi Pledge Grand Prize
Take the pledge to raise your mower height to 3 inches
and let clippings fall for water and fertilizer savings.
Take the Pledge here, www.ci.mavlewood.mn.us/nclMowHiPledc:e
(Only Maplewood and North St. Paul residents who
take the Pledge qualify for the Mow-Hi Prize Drawing.)
2011 GREEN Yard Events!
Mow-Hi Pledge Event & Lawn Care Seminar
Thursday, April 7, 6:30PM - 8:30PM
Learn about research results demonstrating that simply raising mower heights and timing your cuts grows healthier
lawns and saves on water, fertilizer and carbon emissions. Take the Mow-Hi Pledge and reap the benefits of more
stress resistant turf grass, money savings and helping the environment. This affair will feature treats and beverage.
Extension horticulturist Bob Mugaas, with more than 33 years experience with turf grass research and education, can answer any of
your turf questions.
FREE Location: Maplewood Library, 3025 Southlawn Drive, Maplewood 55109
Registration not required.
Native Trees, Thursday, April 21, 6:30 PM - 8:30 PM
Our native trees celebrate tbe seasons with colorful leaves and fruits. Dr. Jim Calkins from the U of MN's Horticultural
Department will help you select trees to provide beauty, shade, privacy, and wildlife habitat in your landscape.
Maplewood residents can find out which trees qualify for the city's rebate.
Fee: $5/person Please pre-pay by April 19.
Location: Maplewood Nature Center, 2659 7th St E, Maplewood, MN 55119.
Fish Creek Wildflower Hike, Saturday, April 30th, 1:00PM-3:00PM
CO-sponsored by The Friends of Maplewood Nature
Discover the beauty of Maplewood 's southern most Greenway; its hard maple forest and early spring woodland
wildflowers. Wear sturdy shoes for this hike along primitive trails and uneven terrain.
Meet at Oakwood Church, 1388 Point Douglas Road South, St. Paul, 55119. All ages welcome.
FREE, please call 651-249-2170 to register by April 28th.
More GREEN Events on next page...
~1!'b'~A2" '~"1n' B'
~FJ:;~'i~1-" $.
,i' 1~{Ji~1L
:1'0' A Su'/.iMble m.plew""d & 710'/. 51. 1.1.uI
Raingarden Open House, Thursday, May 5, 6-8 PM
Get inspired by the rainwater features at the Extreme
GREEN Makeover home yard, including rain gardens,
dry creek bed & trench drain.
FREE Phone registration appreciated, 651-249-2170
Location: 2211 Ariel St. N, Maplewood, MN 55109
Tree-Mendous Arbor Day Event, Sat, May 7, 2-4 PM
Celebrate Tree-mendous trees! Hike the 'Tree Quest' to
find native trees. Information will be available on tree
disease, and tree care, including how to properly prune
and plant a tree. 2-3 foot Oak and Maple tree seedlings
will be available. Test your tree knowledge on the wheel
of nature, go for rides on the Tree bucket - the view is
great from the top! Enjoy spring treats from trees, crafts
and music.
Location: Maplewood Nature Center, 2659 7th St E,
Maplewood, MN 55119.
All Ages welcome Free, Drop-in program
Exploring the Holloway-Beaver Creek Greenway
Saturday, May 14, 9 AM -12 :00 noon
Did you know Maplewood has four official green way
corridors? Learn about greenways then explore the
ecology of the Holloway-Beaver Creek greenway. After-
ward, take a bus tour of the greenway, including short
hikes, to see natural areas and stewardship projects on
both public and private lands.
Adults and students age 14 and up.
Location: Hill Murray School, 2625 Larpenteur Avenue
E, Maplewood, MN 55109.
Fee: $5 covers bus and snack. Pre- pay by May 12.
GREEN Garden Tour, Tues, May 24, 6:30 - 8:00PM
Get the lowdown on how to create pocket gardens of na-
tive plantings in your yard. There's a native plant for
any tough situation whether sun, shade, wet or just plain
crummy soil, Bring your questions for the guided tour of
the nature center's butterfly, rain and shade gardens,
FREE Please call MNC at 651-249-2170 to register.
Location: Maplewood Nature Center, 2659 7th St E, Ma-
plewood, MN 55119.
Rainbarrellnstallation Demos
Choose Thurs, May 26 or Wed, June 8, 7:00PM
Learn the techniques necessary for successful rain bar-
rel installation and get answers to your questions.
Location: Residential yards, TBA
Adults FREE Phone registration, 651-249-2170
Registration form on next page...
GREEN Yards Registration - most events require registration
A RAIN GARDEN FOR YOUR YARD SERIES- STOPPING WATER WHERE IT DROPS Cost
D Classroom Session (North St. Paul); Wednesday, March 16, 6:30-S:30PM Cost: $5.....................~
D ill! (Little Canada); Thursday, March 31, 6:30-S:30PM Cost: $5........................~
D Field Session: Drainage and Soils: Thursday, April 14, 6:00-S:00 PM, Cost: $5 ......................~
D Design Workshop: Garden Layout & Plant Design: Thurs, April 2S, 6:30-S:30PM Cost: $5 ....._
D Rain Garden OPEN HOUSE: Thursday, May 6, 6:00-S:00P!"1 ............................................FREE
D Mow-Hi Pledge Event & Lawn Care Seminar: Thursday, April 7, 6:30-S:30PM ..........................FREE
D Native Trees: Thursday, April 21, 6:30-S:30PM Cost: $5.................................................................... _
D Fish Creek Wildflower Hike: Saturday, April 30, 1-3 PM, ............................................................. FREE
D A Tree-Mendous Arbor Day Event: Saturday, May 7, 2-4 PM, ........................................................FREE
D Exploring the Holloway-Beaver Creek Greenway: Saturday, May 14, 9-noon Cost: $5 ..........._
D GREEN Garden Tour: Tuesday, May 24, 6:30-S PM, ..........................................................................FREE
D Rain Barrel Installation Demonstration: Thursday, May 26, 6:30 PM, ....................... ................FREE
D Rain Barrel Installation Demonstration: Wednesday, June S, 6:30 PM, ... .........................FREE
TOTAL AMOUNT
Name(s):
Address:
Email:
Phone:
Please fill in the information; mail or drop off form with any payment to Maplewood Nature Center,
2659 East 7th Street, Maplewood, MN 55119, 651-249-2170.
OR Register Online: follow the link on www.ci.maplewood.mn.us/nc/GREENyard
Payment Method
Check Enclosed: Check Number:
Amount $
D Visa Card Number
D MasterCard Exp. Date
Signature