Panel: Ralph F. Patterson, John Smith, George M. Reed
The appellants brought an appeal against several pesticide use permits issued to the respondent for the purposes of spraying Vision herbicide to control unwanted plant species in the Clearwater area. The appellants alleged that the application of Vision to the forest ecosystem will cause an adverse effect. They maintained that the application is unreasonable since only partial testing is available on the full formulation. The appellant called several witnesses whose evidence attempted to show the damage on the forest ecosystem through killing certain unwanted species of plants.
The Board found that no evidence was presented showing that there would be an adverse effect on the sites in question. The Board stated that an appellant must attempt to show that the permit holder will not apply or is incapable of applying the herbicide safely and in accordance with the pesticide label, or that the site itself will not lend itself to safe application. However the Board did cancel one permit which allowed application near the Adams River since it found the ecosystem there of an extremely sensitive nature and even a remote risk of contamination should be avoided.
