Preview
FILED: WARREN COUNTY CLERK 06/20/2024 03:52 PM INDEX NO. EF2024-72703
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/20/2024
Delphine Knight Brown
5201Bluff Head Road
Huletts Landing, NewYork 12841
February 15, 2024
Brian Primeau
Bureau of Pesticides Management
NYSDEC,Region 5
232 Golf Course Road
Warrensburg, NY 12885-0220
Re: Riparian Owner and User Objection Proposed Aquatic Herbicide Treatment
to
(ProcellaCOR) in Sheep MeadowBay and Blairs Bay, Lake George
Dear Mr. Primeau,
I amwriting you on behalf of myself and my family as an adjacent riparian owner and
to
user to formally and strenuously object to the proposed treatment using the herbicide
ProcellaCOR in our pristine bay. Our home is located at 5201 Bluff Head Road, comprising 565
Meadow"
feet of shoreline in the center of the proposed treatment area of "Sheep Bay, and we
did not receive the Letter of Notification, dated January 30, 2024, from the Lake George Park
Commission. Wewill likely bear the most potent impact from this chemical for an undetermined
length of time. Myfamily has enjoyed living on and in Lake George for over 125 years. Lake
George is America's no. 1 cleanest lake. Whyis the LGPCproposing to dump a broad spectrum
chemical herbicide, whose short and long term effects are unknown, into the Queen of America's
lakes to attempt to eradicate a weed that has been successfully harvested in the past?
I amalso writing to you to formally request that the Department deny the requested
permit on the basis of this objection and the substantial harm that will be created in our bay and
to our use of our property as a result of this proposed aquatic herbicide treatment in our bay. If
you do not deny the requested permit, we respectfully request an adjudicatory hearing in
accordance with Department guidance and precedent.
Myfamily uses the lake for drinking, cooking, showering, swimming, water sports, and
fishing. Wehave family memberswith pre-existing health conditions, young children, womenof
child-bearing age and pets in our immediate family and among our guests. Lake water is
naturally and unavoidably ingested while children are swimming, family and friends play water
sports and pets use the lake as a d 2 urce. Wealso enjoy eating the fish caught in the Lake
and the diversity of the species that thrive in e rich and delicate ecosytem. Weare in a
relatively quiet area of the lake which is also home to many species of wildlife, many that are
endangered who also drink the water and eat the fish. Since my parents passed away, we rent our
home during the Summermonths to folks from all over the World who want to vacation on the
shore of Lake George. Wecannot see any evidence of milfoil from our dock, so it doesn't effect
our enjoyment of the w'ater or that of our renters. Whatever has grown since the last harvesting
over five years ago, is virtually unseen and does not affect navigation or swimming. But the
application of an herbicide would certainly cause cancellations or lack of interest in renting. This
FILED: WARREN COUNTY CLERK 06/20/2024 03:52 PM INDEX NO. EF2024-72703
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/20/2024
would cause severe financial hardship for myfamily because we use the rental income to pay
and make required repairs
real estate taxes to the property.
I also own a second property 1010 County Route 6 in Huletts Landing, also on the
at
water within the drift There is no milfoil in the water around this property
plan for the herbicide.
yet the effects of the herbicide application would be unavoidable. The only source of water for
this house is the lake. Myfamily, guests, renters and pets at this house drink, cook with, shower
in, and use lake water to water the lawn, plants and bushes. There is a community beach next to
my property where thousands of people of all ages swim each year. My daughter is a competitive
swimmer and trains at least two hours each day in the water. Her internal and external exposure
to the herbicide would be substantial with no knowledge of the longterm effect.
I urge you to halt this proposed use of the aquatic herbicide treatment process until the
impacted public, including my family, given an opportunity to contest in an adjudicatory
is
non-
hearing the many unresolved issues concerning the impact that this treatment will have on
target organisms, including endangered species and organisms that live in the lake bottom, and
the impact this treatment will have on the overall quality of life on Lake George as we have
known it for over 125 years.
As riparian lakefront owners and users, we have substantial personal, heritage, and
financialinvestment in Lake George. There is a real risk that our near- and long-term use of the
Lake could be significantly and adversely affected by the State's action. Examples of substantial
adverse effects include:
" As warned by the ProcellaCOR label, weed biotypes that are resistant to
this herbicide are likely to develop, thus necessitating a long-term addition
to chemical treatments;
" The ProcellaCOR registration and subsequent published literature
identifies impacts on native plants food web
that could upset the delicate
and ecology of the Lake, including potential adverse impact on fisheries
and existing wetland classifications and levels of protection;
" As warned by the ProcellaCOR label, there are expected restrictions and
impacts on irrigation of gardens and livestock; and
" Irrevocable reputational damage to the pristine character of Lake George,
including potentially damaging impacts to property rental and sales values,
particularly in the treatment areas.
have read the position paper from the Lake George Association and the Lake George
I
Waterkeeper and support all of the issues identified therein. I believe that there is no need to rush
to use chemical treatments in Lake George, that effective non-chemical treatment methods exist
and have been proven successful, and that we should not experiment in Lake George.
At the most basic level, I believe the State has failed to demonstrate that the benefits of
the use of ProcellaCOR outweigh the known and unknown short- and long-term risks associated
with the introduction of a hormone-acting herbicide in Lake George. I believe this pesticide was
registered and intended for use in grossly infested waterbodies where basic uses (e.g.
FILED: WARREN COUNTY CLERK 06/20/2024 03:52 PM INDEX NO. EF2024-72703
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/20/2024
transportation, hydropower, boating, swimming) are fundamentally impaired or prevented due to
gross infestations of invasive plants. That is just not the case in Lake George.
As has been demonstrated through affidavits in the pending litigation and extensive
public comments before the APArelative to the previous applications that were nullified in
court, there are substantial questions concerning how quickly the herbicide will drift from the
target area. Therefore, impacts will occur to non-target species and organisms inside and outside
of the proposed treatment area. These concerns are supported by a preponderance ofrecent
literature published since the registration of this herbicide that identifies substantial problems in
real-world applications in larger lakes. Examples of these recent research findings include:
" Use of dyes with the pesticide by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in
other lakes shows great difficulty in achieving needed concentration-
exposure times because of dynamic and moving water in the lakes.
" Inadequate pre- and post-monitoring to determine herbicide efficacy and
environmental impacts.
" DNA/genetic testing is needed to distinguish between Eurasian
watermilfoil and hybrid/native milfoils.
" Impacts on native aquatic vegetation is clearly demonstrated, and
"selective"
ProcellaCOR not as
is as represented.
"hormesis,"
" Substantiated evidence that or unintended accelerated growth
of aquatic vegetation, will occur at diluted levels of the herbicide.
" Since the pesticide registrant (SePRO) chose not to apply for a U.S. EPA
experimental use permit, there is a lack of information on the use and
efficacy of the pesticide in actual lakes.
In addition, there are better and successful alternatives to the proposed chemical
treatment, including diver-assisted suction harvesting. It's interesting to note that the APA's
presentation to the APABoard in April 2022 showed that Blairs Bay was hand harvested
annually from 2007 through 2017, and no hand harvesting has been conducted since. In the case
of Sheep MeadowBay, hand harvesting was stopped in 2014! Webelieve the State's rationale
for chemical treatment would not exist had it simply continued the safer hand-harvesting
alternative in these two bays. The failure to continue hand harvesting in Blairs Bay and Sheep
MeadowBay, along with the State's mischaracterization of adverse impacts of Eurasian
"crisis."
watermilfoil in Lake George, is part of this manufactured
In accordance with NewYork
State Department of Environmental Conservation Policy
DSHM-PES-05-05 Aquatic Permit Program, we understand that, as riparian
Pesticide
owners/users, our consent must be obtained, or the applicant must be able to certify that we will
not be adversely impacted by the proposed treatment. The applicant has demonstrated that we
will not be adversely impacted, and we most certainly do not consent.
Based on the issues identified in this letter paper from the
and the position
LGA/Waterkeeper, we respectfully request that the permit applications be denied. As we stated
above, if the Department believes that the permit application should be processed, in accordance
with Policy DSHM-PES-05-05, this matter should be referred to an adjudicatory hearing relative
to the substantive and significant issues that have been identified in opposition to the use of
FILED: WARREN COUNTY CLERK 06/20/2024 03:52 PM INDEX NO. EF2024-72703
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/20/2024
ProcellaCOR in Lake George and the impacts to the use and value of our properties that cannot
be mitigated.
Respectfully,
Delphine Knight Brown
LGIMH24@gmail.com
(203) 979-5492 (mobile)
Preview
FILED: WARREN COUNTY CLERK 06/20/2024 03:52 PM INDEX NO. EF2024-72703 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/20/2024 Delphine Knight Brown 5201Bluff Head Road Huletts Landing, NewYork 12841 February 15, 2024 Brian Primeau Bureau of Pesticides Management NYSDEC,Region 5 232 Golf Course Road Warrensburg, NY 12885-0220 Re: Riparian Owner and User Objection Proposed Aquatic Herbicide Treatment to (ProcellaCOR) in Sheep MeadowBay and Blairs Bay, Lake George Dear Mr. Primeau, I amwriting you on behalf of myself and my family as an adjacent riparian owner and to user to formally and strenuously object to the proposed treatment using the herbicide ProcellaCOR in our pristine bay. Our home is located at 5201 Bluff Head Road, comprising 565 Meadow" feet of shoreline in the center of the proposed treatment area of "Sheep Bay, and we did not receive the Letter of Notification, dated January 30, 2024, from the Lake George Park Commission. Wewill likely bear the most potent impact from this chemical for an undetermined length of time. Myfamily has enjoyed living on and in Lake George for over 125 years. Lake George is America's no. 1 cleanest lake. Whyis the LGPCproposing to dump a broad spectrum chemical herbicide, whose short and long term effects are unknown, into the Queen of America's lakes to attempt to eradicate a weed that has been successfully harvested in the past? I amalso writing to you to formally request that the Department deny the requested permit on the basis of this objection and the substantial harm that will be created in our bay and to our use of our property as a result of this proposed aquatic herbicide treatment in our bay. If you do not deny the requested permit, we respectfully request an adjudicatory hearing in accordance with Department guidance and precedent. Myfamily uses the lake for drinking, cooking, showering, swimming, water sports, and fishing. Wehave family memberswith pre-existing health conditions, young children, womenof child-bearing age and pets in our immediate family and among our guests. Lake water is naturally and unavoidably ingested while children are swimming, family and friends play water sports and pets use the lake as a d 2 urce. Wealso enjoy eating the fish caught in the Lake and the diversity of the species that thrive in e rich and delicate ecosytem. Weare in a relatively quiet area of the lake which is also home to many species of wildlife, many that are endangered who also drink the water and eat the fish. Since my parents passed away, we rent our home during the Summermonths to folks from all over the World who want to vacation on the shore of Lake George. Wecannot see any evidence of milfoil from our dock, so it doesn't effect our enjoyment of the w'ater or that of our renters. Whatever has grown since the last harvesting over five years ago, is virtually unseen and does not affect navigation or swimming. But the application of an herbicide would certainly cause cancellations or lack of interest in renting. This FILED: WARREN COUNTY CLERK 06/20/2024 03:52 PM INDEX NO. EF2024-72703 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/20/2024 would cause severe financial hardship for myfamily because we use the rental income to pay and make required repairs real estate taxes to the property. I also own a second property 1010 County Route 6 in Huletts Landing, also on the at water within the drift There is no milfoil in the water around this property plan for the herbicide. yet the effects of the herbicide application would be unavoidable. The only source of water for this house is the lake. Myfamily, guests, renters and pets at this house drink, cook with, shower in, and use lake water to water the lawn, plants and bushes. There is a community beach next to my property where thousands of people of all ages swim each year. My daughter is a competitive swimmer and trains at least two hours each day in the water. Her internal and external exposure to the herbicide would be substantial with no knowledge of the longterm effect. I urge you to halt this proposed use of the aquatic herbicide treatment process until the impacted public, including my family, given an opportunity to contest in an adjudicatory is non- hearing the many unresolved issues concerning the impact that this treatment will have on target organisms, including endangered species and organisms that live in the lake bottom, and the impact this treatment will have on the overall quality of life on Lake George as we have known it for over 125 years. As riparian lakefront owners and users, we have substantial personal, heritage, and financialinvestment in Lake George. There is a real risk that our near- and long-term use of the Lake could be significantly and adversely affected by the State's action. Examples of substantial adverse effects include: " As warned by the ProcellaCOR label, weed biotypes that are resistant to this herbicide are likely to develop, thus necessitating a long-term addition to chemical treatments; " The ProcellaCOR registration and subsequent published literature identifies impacts on native plants food web that could upset the delicate and ecology of the Lake, including potential adverse impact on fisheries and existing wetland classifications and levels of protection; " As warned by the ProcellaCOR label, there are expected restrictions and impacts on irrigation of gardens and livestock; and " Irrevocable reputational damage to the pristine character of Lake George, including potentially damaging impacts to property rental and sales values, particularly in the treatment areas. have read the position paper from the Lake George Association and the Lake George I Waterkeeper and support all of the issues identified therein. I believe that there is no need to rush to use chemical treatments in Lake George, that effective non-chemical treatment methods exist and have been proven successful, and that we should not experiment in Lake George. At the most basic level, I believe the State has failed to demonstrate that the benefits of the use of ProcellaCOR outweigh the known and unknown short- and long-term risks associated with the introduction of a hormone-acting herbicide in Lake George. I believe this pesticide was registered and intended for use in grossly infested waterbodies where basic uses (e.g. FILED: WARREN COUNTY CLERK 06/20/2024 03:52 PM INDEX NO. EF2024-72703 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/20/2024 transportation, hydropower, boating, swimming) are fundamentally impaired or prevented due to gross infestations of invasive plants. That is just not the case in Lake George. As has been demonstrated through affidavits in the pending litigation and extensive public comments before the APArelative to the previous applications that were nullified in court, there are substantial questions concerning how quickly the herbicide will drift from the target area. Therefore, impacts will occur to non-target species and organisms inside and outside of the proposed treatment area. These concerns are supported by a preponderance ofrecent literature published since the registration of this herbicide that identifies substantial problems in real-world applications in larger lakes. Examples of these recent research findings include: " Use of dyes with the pesticide by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in other lakes shows great difficulty in achieving needed concentration- exposure times because of dynamic and moving water in the lakes. " Inadequate pre- and post-monitoring to determine herbicide efficacy and environmental impacts. " DNA/genetic testing is needed to distinguish between Eurasian watermilfoil and hybrid/native milfoils. " Impacts on native aquatic vegetation is clearly demonstrated, and "selective" ProcellaCOR not as is as represented. "hormesis," " Substantiated evidence that or unintended accelerated growth of aquatic vegetation, will occur at diluted levels of the herbicide. " Since the pesticide registrant (SePRO) chose not to apply for a U.S. EPA experimental use permit, there is a lack of information on the use and efficacy of the pesticide in actual lakes. In addition, there are better and successful alternatives to the proposed chemical treatment, including diver-assisted suction harvesting. It's interesting to note that the APA's presentation to the APABoard in April 2022 showed that Blairs Bay was hand harvested annually from 2007 through 2017, and no hand harvesting has been conducted since. In the case of Sheep MeadowBay, hand harvesting was stopped in 2014! Webelieve the State's rationale for chemical treatment would not exist had it simply continued the safer hand-harvesting alternative in these two bays. The failure to continue hand harvesting in Blairs Bay and Sheep MeadowBay, along with the State's mischaracterization of adverse impacts of Eurasian "crisis." watermilfoil in Lake George, is part of this manufactured In accordance with NewYork State Department of Environmental Conservation Policy DSHM-PES-05-05 Aquatic Permit Program, we understand that, as riparian Pesticide owners/users, our consent must be obtained, or the applicant must be able to certify that we will not be adversely impacted by the proposed treatment. The applicant has demonstrated that we will not be adversely impacted, and we most certainly do not consent. Based on the issues identified in this letter paper from the and the position LGA/Waterkeeper, we respectfully request that the permit applications be denied. As we stated above, if the Department believes that the permit application should be processed, in accordance with Policy DSHM-PES-05-05, this matter should be referred to an adjudicatory hearing relative to the substantive and significant issues that have been identified in opposition to the use of FILED: WARREN COUNTY CLERK 06/20/2024 03:52 PM INDEX NO. EF2024-72703 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 4 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/20/2024 ProcellaCOR in Lake George and the impacts to the use and value of our properties that cannot be mitigated. Respectfully, Delphine Knight Brown LGIMH24@gmail.com (203) 979-5492 (mobile)