IDAHO STATE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
EURASIAN WATERMILFOIL PROGRAM
PHASE III APPLICATION COVERSHEET
Name of Primary Organization: BOUNDARYCOUNTY
Address: POBOX 419 BONNERS FERRY, IDAHO83805
Federal Tax ID #: 82-6000287
Name: GLENDA POSTON Title: COUNTYCLERK
Phone:208-267-2242 Fax:208-267-7814 Email:
Please check one:
Xsingle entity 0 Joint application (if joint, please attach list of cooperators)
Project Title: KootenaiRiver Eurasian Watermilfoil Control Project
Brief Description of Project(Attach complete abstract highlighting each program element):
Total Project Cost: $ Fund Request:$ 75,000 $ Match: $
Total Amount Requested from ISDA for Current Year: $ 75,000
______
Certification: I understand that the project narrative portion of this application, the award letter and
project final report will be posted for viewing on the ISDA website. Additionally, other documents may
be released as required by the Idaho Public Records Law (Title 9, Chapter 3, Idaho Code). I certify, to the
best of my knowledge, that the information on this application is true and correct and that I am legally
authorized to sign and submit this application on behalf of this organization.
Ron Smith ______
Printed Name of Authorized Signatory Signature
Chairman, Commissioners 1/22/08
Title Date
Submit the coversheet and the completed narrative to:
(By regular U.S. Mail) (Physical Address for Delivery)
Idaho State Department of Agriculture Idaho State Department of Agriculture
Noxious Weeds Program Noxious Weeds Program
Attn: Matt Voile, Agriculture Section Manager Attn:Matt Voile, Agriculture Section Manager Box 790 2270 old Penitentiary Road
Boise, Idaho83701 Boise, Idaho83712
Proposed Eurasian Watermilfoil (EWM) Control Plan for 2008
KootenaiRiver, Boundary County, Idaho
Background and Justification:
Eurasian Watermilfoil was first discovered the fall of 2006 in the Kootenai River running through Boundary County in it’s entirety from the Montana border in the east into Kootenay lake in British Colombia to the North. The KootenaiRiver is home to the white sturgeon, which is on the federal endangered species list and the bull trout on the threatened species list. Burbot is also being considered to be placed on the endangered list, with extremely low numbers and no evidence of re production. While it is unclear the reasons for the declining numbers and lack of reproduction for these fish species, the possibility remains that the presence of Eurasian milfoil in this system is having a detrimental impact on the fish that inhabit the Kootenai. It has been established Eurasian milfoil degrades water quality, out competes native vegetation, and can form mono specific stands reducing native plant diversity and abundance, which in turn reduces the diversity and abundance of invertebrate species when compared to native plant communities.
An extensive mapping survey was conducted in October of 2007 by the AquaTechnex corp. and the BoundaryCounty weed department following protocols set forth by the Idaho State Department of Agriculture. There was found to be 504 acres of milfoil beds present in the KootenaiRiver at this time. An unofficial survey done by the County weed department and the Kootenai Tribe hatchery staff in the fall of 2006 estimated there to be approximately 400 acres infested. Several areas were observed with little or no milfoil present. Those same areas by the fall of 2007 were completely inundated with Eurasian milfoil, indicating it is spreading rapidly, with significant acres infested in just one season. There is every indication that in a matter of time most of the native vegetation will be replaced with dense beds of Eurasian milfoil unless control measures are put in place.
In August of 2007 aquatic plant specialists Dr Bill Haller of Florida State University and Dr. John Madsen of Mississippi State University along with officials of the Idaho State Department of Agriculture, the Kootenai Tribe, Idaho Fish and Game and Canada toured the Kootenai to access the milfoil problem and discuss control strategies. Dr. Haller developed a control plan as a result of that tour. That proposal follows.
Activity Plan: The Idaho legislature has provided for the eradication of EWM from Idaho waters to protect and preserve that unique natural resource of the state. EWM is a submersed, invasive aquatic plant that has aggressively formed monotypic infestations in lakes, reservoirs and rivers throughout the northern US. EWM control is largely carried out through the use of herbicides, with some reliance on mechanical and hand removal of small infestations. Control and eradication of EWM in lakes and other quiescent water bodies is relatively inexpensive and possible with aquatic herbicides. EWM control becomes very difficult in large river run reservoirs and in flowing rivers where it is difficult to protect applied herbicides from rapid dilution and mixing with untreated waters.
KootenaiRiver: The KootenaiRiver in Boundary County, Idaho is unique when evaluating the potential for the control/eradication of EWM. The hydrology and water flow in the river is highly variable, but seasonal. Water discharge in the spring/summer typically reaches 30 to 40,000 CFS depending upon snow melt, rainfall and water conditions in upstream reservoirs. By fall/winter discharge is typically < 4,000 CFS, and often as low as 1 to 2,000 CFS. The high water discharge and resulting high flow rate (velocity) during spring and summer prevents the use of aquatic herbicides for EWM since it is impossible to maintain toxic concentrations of herbicides in the milfoil beds along the river edge. Also, during these high flow periods; water depth in the EWM beds is 8-16 ft deep.
In addition, the water in the north flowing KootenaiRiver has the following uses:
- Irrigation of crops from May – September
- Potable water supply to Creston, BC, possibly others.
- Water supply for the Kootenai Tribe fish hatchery
The EWM in the river can only be treated when river discharge/flows are at their minimum around October 1, there is still significant flow and we are not certain that any herbicides will be effective without trials. The river and vegetation types are denoted in Figures 1 and 2. During high discharge the water depth in Zone A is 0-8 ft deep and is characterized by native submersed plants that arise annually from seed germination including pondweeds, ranunculus and other annual native species. Zone B is in water depths of 8-16 ft and the vegetation may also be native species, but most of Zone B is dominated by Microphyllum sp., principally EWM. When water discharge decreases in the fall to 2,000 CFS or less, Zone A becomes dewatered, and the EWM in Zone B becomes surface matted in 0-8 ft of water depth. This will be the most opportune time to treat EWM in the river.
Proposed Treatments: Due to the flow in the KootenaiRiver it will be necessary to use aquatic herbicides that are rapidly absorbed by EWM. The contact time of the herbicide on EWM will be low, so near maximum concentrations of fast acting herbicides will be required to increase the likelihood of acceptable EWM control.
It is also proposed to treat EWM beds near boat launching points to reduce the chances of EWM being transported to other water bodies that are currently free of EWM. The herbicides suggested for evaluation are listed in Table 1.
The application of these herbicides in public boat ramp areas, in 4 acre blocks, should not impact irrigation or potable water supplies. The irrigation season is over by October 1 (this should be verified) and the proposed treatment areas are many miles from potable water intakes (which should also be verified).
Hypothetical concentrations: Theoretical herbicide concentrations in water moving down stream can be made with several assumptions. Using the maximum application rate of 10 GPA of a 3.8 lb gallon of 2,4-D liquid, in 2000 CFS discharge. Assume a 1 hour application time and all the herbicide ends up in the downstream flow in 1 hour (it won’t). This scenario indicates an hourly discharge of 165 acre ft/hour. Thirty-eight pounds of 2,4-D/acre in 4 ft of water X 4 acres = 3.62 ppm in 16 acre ft. Assume this 16 acre ft is diluted by a 1-hour discharge in the river of 165 acre ft., the dilution factor is approximately 10. So the theoretical maximum concentration moving downstream is 0.352 ppm (Table 2). This is about 5X the allowable concentration of 2,4-D allowed in potable water (0.070 ppm). Dilution and mixing, plant uptake, and degradation of 2,4-D in the river would surely reduce 2,4-D concentrations below the 0.070 ppm standard over a several mile river distance.
Similar calculations can be made for the other herbicides as indicated in Table 2. The water use limits are concentrations allowed in potable water. Based upon these calculations there appears to be essentially no chance of exceeding water use limits at potable water intakes 10-20 miles downstream. The liquid herbicides applied in these plots will bleed out over several hours, and the granular applications would bleed out over an even longer period because they release the herbicide over several hours.
Due to the concentration/exposure requirements of these herbicides on EWM, reduction of application concentrations is not feasible. Application of all 4 herbicides at concentrations equal to, or below water use limits will not provide EWM control.
Summary: It is proposed that BoundaryCounty determines the most effective means of controlling EWM adjacent to public boat launching areas on the KootenaiRiver to reduce the chance of spreading this invasive aquatic weed to other sites. Four fast acting herbicides are proposed to be applied in September-October 2008 after the irrigation season and when water discharge drops to less than 2000 CFS. Herbicide effectiveness will have to be determined the following year, but we would anticipate 2 years of significant reduction of EWM in the treatment plots. As the most effective treatments are determined, the program will be expanded to additional boat ramps in the county.
Table 1. Herbicides proposed for 4-acre plots at public access points on the KootenaiRiver for Eurasian Water milfoil control, October 2008.
Herbicide / Contact Time / Max Dose Label / Method of Application2,4-D granular / 6-12 hrs / 200 lbs/A / Granular spreader
Triclopyr OTF3/ / 6-12 hrs / 2.5 ppm / Surface applied
Diquat1/ / 1-3 hrs / 0.37 ppm / Weighted trailing hoses2/
Endothall-Super K / 3-6 hrs / 5.0 ppm / Granular spreader
Additiional Possibilities
2,4-D liquid / 6-12 hrs / up to 10 gpa / Weighted trailing hoses
Triclopyr liquid3/ / 6/12 hrs / 2.5 ppm / Weighted trailing hoses
Endothall-K, liquid / 3-6 hrs / 5.0 ppm / Weighted trailing hoses
1/Diquat Section 3 label allows 2 gallons of diquat/acre. An Idaho 24C SLN label allows application of 1 gallon/2 acre ft of water for a maximum concentration of 0.37 ppm.
2/Weighted trailing hoses allow injection of liquid herbicides into the weed bed to protect it from rapid dilution. See appendix for construction of weighted hoses.
3/Triclopyr label states “Do not use in unimpounded rivers or streams.” This would appear to prohibit the use of triclopyr in BoundaryCounty as this river section is not impacted by reservoirs.
Table 2. Theoretical water concentrations of herbicides used in 4 acre treatment sites 4 ft. deep on the KootenaiRiver, assuming a discharge of 2,000 CFS (165 acre ft/hour) and application time of 1 hour.
Herbicide / Rate/acre(max concn.) / Theoretical max. 1-hour concn.2/ / ½ life in ponds (days) / Water use limits
2,4-D / 38 lbs (3.52 ppm)1/ / 0.352 ppm / 5-10 / 0.070 ppm
Triclopyr / Variable (2.5 ppm) / 0.250 ppm / 1-4 / 0.400 ppm
Diquat / Variable (0.37 ppm) / 0.037 ppm / 1.0 / 0.020 ppm
Endothall / Variable (5.0 ppm) / 0.500 ppm / 1-5 / 0.100 ppm
1/38 lbs A.I. equals 10 gallons/acre. Concentration is 38 lbs in 4 ft of water.
2/Concentration in water (16 acre ft, 4 acres x 4 ft deep) diluted by 165 acre ft per hour discharge. 16 165 ~ 10%.
Figure 1. Surface view of the KootenaiRiver showing water depths in October (< 2,000 CFS). Zone A = native plant zone (dry during low flows); Zone B = EWM.
Figure 2. Cross-sectional diagrams of KootenaiRiver in summer (A) with high discharge and in fall (B) with low discharge.
Goals and Objectives:
Set up 5 test trial sites of 4 acres each to determine if chemical treatment is a viable
control option for Eurasian milfoil in this river system.
Monitor the mapping effort of 2007 to verify the extent of infestation during the 2008
growing season and add the data to that survey.
Placement of bethnic barriers in key locations near the boat launch site near
the Canadian border at Port hill Idaho. This site is too near Canadian waters to treat
chemically.
Bids will be submitted to qualified licensed contractors, experience, expertise, and
proper equipment will be the considered factors.
The BoundaryCounty weed department will be the lead agency in coordinating
the project efforts.
The Boundary County Auditors office will be in charge of accounting and record keeping
It is estimated $3,500 of county labor will used as an in-kind contribution towards this
project.
Expected Outcomes:
Acquire accurate data to up date the mapping survey done in 2007
Establish if herbicide treatments will be an effective control option
Establish some control of EWM with the use of bethnic barriers
Develop an educational out reach program to inform the public the threat
EWM poses to the environment. This will be accomplished through newspaper
and other publications as well by radio and public meetings.
Proposed chemicals to be applied:
Renovate OTF by SePro EPA# 67690-42
Navigate 2,4D by applied bio-chemists EPA# 228-378-8959
Reward by Syngenta EPA#100-1091
Aquathol K by Cerexagri Inc. EPA# 4581-204
Aquathol Super K by Cerexagri EPA# 4581-388
Aqua-Kleen by Cerexagri EPA# 228-378-4581
Budget proposal for Boundary County Milfoil Project / Estimated CostHerbicide Test Trial 20 acres / $ 30,000
Survey and Mapping / $ 12,000
Bottom Barriers / $ 10,000
Public Notices, legals ,etc / $ 1,000
Education, outreach- newspapers, radio, sinage etc. / $ 5,000
Required water sampling / $ 10,000
Administrative fees / $ 2,000
Post treatment monitoring / $ 5,000
Total Projected Budget / $ 75,000
Idaho State Department of Agriculture
Application of Bottom Barriers in Idaho Waters
1. Project Title: KootenaiRiver Eurasian Water milfoil control project
2. Project Location:
County:BoundaryCounty
GPS Coordinates (Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) NAD 1983):
Include map or detailed drawing of exact project location.
3. Project Description:Install bottom Barriers near the boat launch at Port hill
4. How will the project be marked for easy location (i.e., floatation device, flags, other)? (See
ISDA/IDL Encroachment Permit #8):Contractor will mark appropriately
5. Total area covered: 1/4 acre
6. Proposed bottom barrier materials/size/construction (See ISDA/IDL Encroachment Permit
#11): Decided by contractor
7. Proposed date bottom barrier will be installed: Sept. 08
8. Proposed date bottom barrier will be removed (Not to exceed 10 weeks) (See ISDA/IDL
Encroachment Permit #9) Nov 08
9. Describe how bottom barrier will be manipulated (professional divers, volunteers, etc.), use of
own equipment or contracted out, etc.Professional Certified Contractor
10. Describe your Public Notification Program, if any is required: Newspaper legals
I hereby certify that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. In
addition, I have read and understand the terms and conditions in the ISDA/IDL Encroachment Permit as they apply to my project.
Ron Smith 1/22/08
Signature of person authorized to sign on behalf of this Date
Eurasian Watermilfoil Program Project
Completed forms should be sent to:
Idaho State Department of Agriculture, Attn: Matt Voile, Noxious Weeds Program, P. O. Box 790, Boise, ID83701
Telephone: (208) 332-8528 Facsimile: (208) 334-2840
*****************************************************************************
For ISDA Use Only _____ APPROVED ______APPROVED WITH MODIFICATIONS:
______DENIED
______SIGNATURE
______DATE ______
Short-Term Activity Exemption Work Sheet
For Application of Aquatic Herbicides to Surface Waters
1. Project Title: KootenaiRiver Eurasian Water milfoil control project
2. Project Location: BoundaryCounty, Bonners FerryId.
County: Township: Range: Sec.: 1/4Sec
or Lat: Long: Provide Map:
3. Project Description: Included in Narrative
Treatment Area: Test sites to be determined by the County, Kootenai Tribe, Idaho Fish& Game. Approximately 20 acres
4. Receiving Water: City of Bonners Ferry. Anheuser-Busch, Kootenai tribe of Idaho, Kootenai National Wildlife refuge
5. Existing and Designated Beneficial Uses (see IDAPA 58.01.02.100 through 160):
Irrigation, Recreation, Domestic
6. Include IDWR Water Rights and map of domestic water supplies:
7. Project Duration: FromSept. To Nov.
8. Proposed Chemical (Include Label Information and Restrictions):
Renovate OTF,Navigate, Reward, Aquathol K, Aquathol Super K, Aqua-Kleen
Labels included
(add additional sheets as necessary)
9. Describe Your Public Notification Program: News paper, and radio ads, public
meetings, sign postings
Authorized Signature: Terry Guthrie Date 1/25/08
Name: Terry Guthrie Title: Boundary CountyWeed Superintendent
If you are applying herbicides, you must submit this work sheet with the narrative of the proposed project
via one of the following:
Mail to: Delivery to: Fax to:
Idaho State Department of Agriculture Idaho State Department of Agriculture (208) 334-2840
Noxious Weeds Program Noxious Weeds Program
Attn: Matt Voile, Agriculture Section Manager Attn: Matt Voile, Agriculture Section Manager
P. O. Box 790 2270 Old Penitentiary Road
Boise, ID83701Boise, ID83712
ISDA Noxious Weed Cost Share Program Line Item Budget CategoriesThis form for use with ISDA's 2008 Eurasian Watermilfoil Program.
Instructions: list estimated expenditure amounts within the categories below. Add rows as needed to insert budget items within categories.
1:1 Match required. Match does not need to equal budget amounts within categories, as long as the 1:1 match is met overall.
Personnel costs can be used as match.
I. Advertising & Legal Notices
Posting treatment schedule in newspaper / 500 / Amount / 500
Advertising bids for applicator in newspaper / 500 / 500
Total / 1,000 / $ - / 1,000
II. Service Contracts
(i.e. aerial spraying, surveying, mapping, or grazing contracts. This category is not for labor or salaries.)
Required water sampling, before and after treatment / 10,000 / Amount / 10,000
Post treatment monitoring / 5,000 / 5,000
Chemical applicator fees / 10,000 / 10,000
Bottom barrier placement- / 10,000 / 10,000
Mapping / 12,000 / 12,000
Administrartive fees / 2,000 / 2,000
Total / 49,000 / $ - / 49,000
III. Public Education & Awareness
(list anticipated project products such as television/radio commercials, print media advertising, etc.)