In response to the first sentence of the Jan. 29 letter “Common sense,” the first sentence, “It was unanimous” [that Clallam County will use herbicides to control invasive roadside weeds] was nearly right.
Reintroducing herbicides to control roadside plants after 26 years was nearly unanimously opposed by the public.
County commissioners received almost 400 comments (check county files).
All but a few opposed.
Commissioner Mark Ozias wrote this in an email to some of the opposition:
“Hours of research and deep learning from highly ethical and experienced habitat biologists like Jill Silver of the 10,000 Years Institute have helped me understand the destructive role these non-native species play in our environment — often in our most sensitive habitats. Most invasives are not used by our more than 400 species of native bees and other pollinators; they are not used as food or forage by native animals.”
Ozias denigrates the knowledge of many who understand plant-animal associations.
Recent science finds that “abundance and diversity matter more than whether species are native or exotic” and that “by studying entire networks of pollinators and plants, biologists have learned that most native bees are far less picky than was imagined,” according to an article in www.nature.com.
The Jan. 29 letter writer referred to “the cancer of non-native invasive weeds.”
Multiple studies have linked cancer to glyphosate (Roundup).
California is poised to place a cancer-warning label on the herbicide.
France banned its sale two years ago.
The county commissioners heard testimony from everyone who stayed, but it appeared that they clearly decided beforehand.
Listening to testimony and considering testimony are two different things.
We can do better than this.
Beverly Goldie,
Sequim