Sea to Sky Invasive Species Council - Latest Blog Entries

SSISC Open House & AGM

Tue, 16 Apr 2013 15:42:00 -0500

SSISC Open House & AGM
Wednesday April 24th, 1 - 4 pm
Executive Suites Hotel, Squamish (40900 Tantalus Rd.)

Please join us for this FREE event to learn about the latest invasive news from local and regional partners, connect with others interested in invasive species management, and have a say on what’s important to you.

In addition to hearing about what the SSISC is planning in 2013, other partners providing updates and opportunities for discussion include:

District of Squamish
Squamish River Watershed Society
Resort Municipality of Whistler
South Coast Conservation Program (species at risk)
Squamish-Lillooet Regional District
BC Hydro
BC Parks
Province of BC (herbicide use around water)
Squamish Nation
Neighbouring invasive organization
and more!

Tasty treats and beverages will also be served.

If you’re looking to get more involved with the group there are exciting opportunities for formal Director and informal Adviser positions. Please contact SSISC before the event to inquire.

For more information on opportunities or the event contact Kristina at ssinvasives@gmail.com, 604-698-8334 or visit www.ssisc.info.

Download poster

ISCMV Spring Forum 2013 April 11

Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:26:00 -0500

ISCMV Spring Forum 2013 April 11

Want to tackle invasive species? Join the Invasive Species Council of Metro Vancouver (ISCMV) for its annual Spring Forum, April 11th, 2013 at the Richmond Oval.

Dig into this forum and discover all aspects of invasive species management including:

Prevention,
New Treatment Methodology,
Volunteer Engagement,
Updates on Legislation and Aquatic/Riparian Herbicide Use, and
Disposal.

Get all the info here.

We encourage you to register by April 8th.

See you there!

Japanese knotweed in context (for fun)

Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:53:00 -0600

See full production here. Note that this is a UK production and the Japanese knotweed is a huge issue in other parts of the world as well, including BC!

DFO Consultation Period on the Intent to Regulate Aquatic Invasive Species

Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:17:00 -0600

Fisheries and Oceans Canada is developing a regulatory proposal to manage and control Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS) in Canada.

The Department is seeking initial input regarding the intent to regulate AIS generally, and is interested in identifying which stakeholders are currently affected by AIS or may be affected by AIS regulations in the future.

The online questionnaire will be posted for 60 days (until February 1, 2013), and Fisheries and Oceans Canada will also be pursuing other opportunities for further consultations.

The background information can be found at http://isdm-gdsi.gc.ca/ais-eae/index-eng.asp

Please take the time to comment as these regulations will help to protect Canada from Aquatic invaders.

Protecting BC waters from aquatic invasive species

Thu, 10 Jan 2013 13:42:00 -0600

VICTORIA –The B.C. government has amended the controlled alien species regulation to protect our environment, with tough fines for those who introduce invasive species into local ecosystems.

The B.C. government has strengthened the regulation, acting on a previous commitment to ban the snakehead fish. All public comments received on the government’s policy paper supported strong action on this issue.

Main measures include:

· Prohibiting the possession, breeding, release or transportation of high-risk aquatic species such as the snakehead. Releasing a live snakehead into local waters could result in a fine of up to $250,000.

· Requiring that no invasive zebra or quagga mussel, alive or dead, be present on boats or related equipment. Failure to clean mussels off boats or equipment could result in a fine of up to $100,000.

Until now, the controlled alien species regulation has been used to control the possession, breeding, shipping and releasing of animals that are not native to B.C., such as tigers, that pose a serious risk to the health or safety of people. For example, currently it is a direct violation of the regulation under the Wildlife Act to possess a prohibited species without a permit.

Given the threats to B.C.’s fish, wildlife and habitat, the new rules target specific aquatic invasive species to prevent these live species from coming into contact with our waters. Many neighbouring Canadian and U.S. jurisdictions have similar restrictions on aquatic invasive species as those announced today.

Other new measures include:

· Adding definitions for “accredited zoo or aquarium,” “certified educational institution” and “certified research institution” to create clarity on standards, and allow exemptions to apply for strict educational or scientific purposes.

· Clarifying which species of monitor lizard are prohibited, typically those that grow over two metres in length or that otherwise create a significant threat to public safety.

Quotes:

Steve Thomson, Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations –

“The strengthened regulation reaffirms our government’s commitment to protect B.C.’s natural ecosystems from exposure to unnecessary risk as a result of the release of invasive non-native species.”

Terry Lake, Minister of Environment –

“The impact of the snakehead and zebra mussel in other jurisdictions has been devastating to those local ecosystems. These regulations are an important step in preventing these invasive species gaining a foothold in B.C.”

Learn More:

· To learn more about controlled alien species regulation, visit:

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlifeactreview/cas/

· To learn more about the accreditation standards that have been developed by the Canadian Association of Zoos and Aquariums (CAZA), visit: http://www.caza.ca/en/about_caza/accreditation_program/

· To learn more about the certification process developed by the Canadian Council on Animal Care, visit: http://www.ccac.ca/

Additional information here.

Whistler amends pesticide regulations around invasive species control

Thu, 29 Nov 2012 14:04:00 -0600

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS

Amendment to Pesticide Use Regulation Bylaw approved by council
The purpose of Pesticide Use Regulation Amendment Bylaw No. 2001, 2012 is to implement a Pesticide Exemption Application process that may permit an approved pesticide applicator to chemically treat invasive species that may cause economic and environmental harm or harm to human health within the boundaries of the RMOW.

Pesticide Use Regulation Bylaw No. 1822, 2007 regulates the application of pesticides for nonessential and cosmetic purposes on private and public lands within the boundaries of the RMOW.

At the time that the bylaw was adopted, an inventory of invasive species within the RMOW boundaries had not yet been completed. Since then the Sea to Sky Invasive Species Council was formed, and has completed an extensive inventory of invasive species and community-wide education.

As a result of increased awareness about invasive species, Japanese Knotweed (Fallopia japonica) and Giant Hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum), sightings reports have increased.

These invasive species pose an economic and environmental threat to the community as these species spread exponentially causing damage to infrastructure, biodiversity, streams and rivers, and even human health.

Because of the persistent nature of Japanese Knotweed and Giant Hogweed, the goal for management of these species is eradication.

RMOW staff, in consultation with the Sea to Sky Invasive Species Council and its community advisory team, have determined that manual and mechanical methods of controlling Japanese Knotweed and Giant Hogweed are no longer effective or viable options, and have agreed that chemical control is necessary to prevent further damage to infrastructure and minimize the threat to Whistler’s biodiversity.

The pesticide regulation bylaw amendment establishes a Pesticide Exemption Application, which will need to be completed and approved by designated RMOW staff before the regulated use of pesticides can occur on public or private lands by Ministry of Environment-certified pesticide applicators. These trained applicators will strategically and judiciously target the use of herbicides; deal with transportation, handling, and storage of pesticides; provide education to targeted audiences; and dispose of the pesticides and containers safely.

Written notice and signs will need to be issued and erected before, during and after an application indicating the type of treatment used for which species, species information, the effects of the chemicals being used, and safety precautions that need to be adhered in addition to other protocols indicated in the bylaw.

Information about applying for pesticide exemption, and identifying invasive species will be posted on whistler.ca.

Council gave first, second, and third readings to the bylaw amendment later in their meeting.

Download the complete presentation.

Banishing blackberries - Squamish residents pull together to tackle invasive plant species

Tue, 18 Sep 2012 19:09:00 -0500

Thanks to Dawn Green and the Squamish Chief for great coverage on a community blackberry pull in Squamish. Here is the article that appeared in the September 13th issue (link directly to Squamish Chief):

Residing only in the memories of long-term residents of Valleycliffe, a weed-choked area lining Little Stawamus Creek was once an open, grassy area suitable for picnics and for viewing grazing deer and other wildlife. Over the years, though, it was replaced with aggressive non-native Himalayan blackberry that out-competed native species and effectively blocked access to the creek.

That’s where Squamish resident Robin Sherry stepped in.

As the driving force of a community project to remove the blackberry infestation, he describes how he moved to Valleycliffe and heard about how it used to be, which was enough to spur him into action.

“Once the blackberry took over,” he said, “you couldn’t even see the creek. People used to walk down by the creek, but it grew up over everything. It was climbing up over our fences.”

Sherry got his neighbours and the Cedar Valley Waldorf School interested and organized a group weed pull a few months ago. The District of Squamish agreed to pick up the material for safe disposal and the Sea to Sky Invasive Species Council (SSISC) offered to loan tools and also helped with educating the students at the school about invasives.

Kristina Swerhun, SSISC executive director, said she was thoroughly impressed by the initiative undertaken by Sherry and the residents.

“He was the driver behind it, we were just helping out,” she noted, describing it as a leading-edge initiative.

“Having a community member being that passionate, that was new — he took it and ran with it,” Swerhun said. “He used his energy to its most extent, where if we had come in, it would have probably taken us twice as long to do the job because we don’t know the area like he does.”

It was still a massive undertaking, involving four days of battling with the blackberries, a mission made easier by the many hands involved.

Roughly 30 students from the Cedar Valley, alongside their teachers and some parents, assisted for a few hours. Swerhun said it was great for them to be involved as the school borders the area where the blackberry was removed.

But not all the students were happy.

“Some of the kids were disappointed the berries were going away,” she said with a laugh, “but I think they understood at the end why it was happening so it was really neat to see the wheels turning in their heads, that this is better for everybody.”

And a few dump truck loads of blackberry vines later, the area was restored to its natural state.

Sherry described the community initiative as “super successful” and said it was great for everyone to come together.

“It looks fantastic back there now,” he noted, “and we’ve already been seeing some wildlife and the kids will go and pick salmon berries, which is a native species. They put some natural grasses down and we’ve been seeing some blue heron fishing in the creek, a family of racoons lives there, the bears wander back there once in a while and we saw a deer there a few weeks back. Everybody is super happy with it.”

He confessed he was not always optimistic that the blackberry could be successfully removed.

“When we started out, it felt like quite the challenge... I really felt like we had bitten off more than we could chew, but it worked out. If you set your mind to it, anything is possible,” he said.

Swerhun agreed.

“The fantastic results obtained goes to show how a small group of determined community members can make a huge difference in supporting our native ecosystems,” she said. Those interested in keeping invasive plants under control may contact the SSISC. More information can be found at www.ssisc.info.

CORRECTION: Asian carp NOT found in Lytton and Lillooet areas

Fri, 24 Aug 2012 14:37:00 -0500

Fisheries and Oceans Canada has just issued an alert for Asian carp, a serious threat to our waterways. Luckily the report of Asian carp was a false alarm. The find would have been very significant since the fish will compete for food with indigenous species and prey on their larvae. They can also cause significant habitat damage and ecological disruption. Moreover, Asian Silver carp tend to jump out of the water and endanger recreational boaters and water skiers. With the support of DFO, proactive efforts are underway to reduce the likelihood of Asian carp species becoming established in Canada. Fishers are urged to keep a watch for Asian carp in Canadian waters!

WHAT TO DO IF YOU FIND INVASIVE SPECIES

Everyone using aquatic habitats can help prevent the introduction and spread of invasive species. 1. Try to identify them; DO NOT THROW BACK INTO THE RIVER! 2. Note the location ( GPS co-ordinates are nice) and observation date; 3. Contact a Fisheries and Oceans Canada Office: 250-256-2650 and/or the SSISC

Download Asian Carp alert

Pemberton community weed pull July 13th

Mon, 09 Jul 2012 14:07:00 -0500

Stewardship Pemberton and the Sea to Sky invasive Species Council are hosting a Pemberton community weed pull. If you’re interested in getting to know your local weeds better and taking action to help our native biodiversity this event is for you! All ages welcome.

The work will be done at the Arn canal and follow up on previous community weed pulls in this area. The canal has had ongoing habitat restoration of streamside and upland vegetation to assist in restoring this area to a more natural state.

Date:Friday July 13^th, 2012

Time:10 am – 12 pm

Meeting location:Pedestrian bridge near highway 99

Bring: Please bring work gloves if possible, tools and refreshments will be supplied
*Rain or shine*

For more information please contact:

Dawn Johnson – Stewarship Pemberton: dawnjohnson@telus.net, 604-698-5686

Kristina Swerhun – Sea to Sky Invasive Species Council: ssinvasives@gmail.com, 604-698-8334

2012 Invasive-free certified companies

Thu, 21 Jun 2012 17:18:00 -0500

The Sea to Sky Invasive Species Council (SSISC) is now in its third year of its Invasive-free Certification program for the horticulture industry, the first of its kind in BC. It all began at a horticulture forum hosted by the SSISC in November of 2010, where there was feedback from the industry that there was a lack of education on invasive species and their significant threats - some even reducing property values. The goal of this program is to integrate targeted invasive species management into the practices of horticulture and landscape companies serving the Sea to Sky corridor, and recognize those companies that are making a difference.

Training is provided to participating companies on:

Species recognition and procurement practices – ensuring products purchased/grown are not invasive
Site & species appropriate control methods – ensuring an understanding of the types available
Disposal practices – ensuring that invasive plant seeds or plant parts are properly disposed of

The program in 2012 involved over 60 participants representing 15 different companies, who have all made a commitment to minimize the threat of invasive species in the Sea to Sky corridor. The SSISC salutes the companies that have volunteered to take part in the program. They are making a difference as we all work together to address this important issue. Look for an Invasive-free Certified sticker on the vehicles and places of business of:

Bathtub Gardens
Deeply Rooted Landscaping
Garden Inspiration
The Gardener’s Yard
Green Admiral Nature Restoration
Heike Designs
High Country Landscaping & Garden Centre NEW
JB Horticultural Services
Jim’s Mowing Eagleview
Latham Landscapes
Miller Capilano Maintenance Corporation – Horticulture crew
Mountainberry Landscaping
Sound Garden Landscape & Design
Village Green Landscapes
Whistler Landscaping

Why should my company participate?
The goal of this program is to promote and integrate effective invasive species management into the practices of horticulture and landscape companies serving the Sea to Sky corridor. Professional development will be provided to participating companies to improve their knowledge in the following three areas:

Species Recognition and Procurement Practices – ensuring products purchased or grown are not invasive
Site & Species Appropriate Control Methods – ensuring a base understanding of the types of control methods available to control a given species
Disposal Practices – ensuring that invasive plant seeds or plant parts are properly disposed of, including ensuring integrity of the compost stream

Upon certification, companies can expect to receive recognition which could potentially translate into increased exposure (i.e. new marketing opportunities & access to a niche market). Support will be provided to all participating businesses to help them reach the commitments of the program.

More reasons to participate part I – Knot on This Property Program
The SSISC has teamed up with the invasive organizations in Metro Vancouver and Fraser Valley on a program called Knot on This Property. This program is designed to educate private land owners and real estate professionals about knotweed and other priority invasive species through online educational resources. The program is set to launch this summer/fall and we expect an increased awareness of the impacts of invasive species and related legal responsibilities for private property owners will create a high demand for the services of Invasive-free Certified Companies.

More reasons to participate part II – Rebate Program for Private land owners
Also, the SSISC is planning to continue to run our Cost Sharing Program for Private Lands program that provides land owners, managers, and occupiers with the guidance and financial resources necessary to manage invasive plants on private property. Scope of this program being funding dependant, it will rebate private landowners up to 50 - 100% of the cost of control of giant hogweed & Japanese knotweed, two of the highest priority invasive species in the corridor and added to the BC Weed Control Act in July 2011. To ensure quality of work, in order to qualify for reimbursement all treatment must be carried out by a SSISC Invasive-free Certified company. See www.ssisc.info for more details.

Frequently asked questions

Q: Who can take part in the program?
A: Although it is designed for those in the horticulture industry (garden centres, nurseries, landscapers, landscape architects) and contractors, anyone if welcome to register.

Q: What defines certification?
A: A company is ‘Invasive-free Certified’ when a minimum of 50% of staff have completed the ‘Invasive-free’ training, including all crew leaders/supervisors, and the company has signed a statement of commitment. For individuals to complete the training, they must have participated in at least one introductory workshop (or equivalent training) and signed a statement of commitment.

Q: What is the cost? (Note: The annual fee covers partial costs of the program and is not a revenue generator)
A: Cost is dependent on size of company: Companies that are up to 10 employees/11-20 employees/over 20 employees will pay $50/$100/$150 respectively per year to be part of the program. For individuals not part of a company working towards certification, the cost to take part is $20. When a company is working towards securing/maintaining certification, there is no limit on how many staff members can attend training in that year. Cost also includes:

all resources, including a print copy of ‘A Guide to Identification and Management of Sea to Sky Invasive Plants’
year round support to all participating businesses to help them reach the commitments of the program
electronic certificates & letters to give clients about the value of being certified
Invasive-free certified stickers
recognition on our website and in correspondence/ads relating to the program

Q: How long is certification valid?
A: Companies need to re-certify annually; individual training is valid for 3 years. Annual certification is important since it keeps companies involved and up to date on new information including news about treatment, emerging invasive species, and new legislation/regulations.

Q: When are the workshops?
A: Participants need to attend just one 2 hour workshop (classroom style) offered in Squamish, Whistler or Pemberton. Availability is on a first come first served basis with additional workshops being added as needed.

Squamish

@ Capilano University

Whistler

@ RMOW Public Works Yard

Pemberton

@ Community Centre

April

· Tues, Apr 16^th, 9-11 am

· Thurs, Apr 25^th, 9-11 am

· Wed, Apr 17^th, 8-10 am

· Tues, Apr 23^rd, 2-4 pm

· Fri, April 26^th, 9-11 am

May

· Wed, May 1^st, 2 – 4 pm

· Fri, May 17^th, 9 – 11 am

· Fri, May 10^th, 8-10 am

· Wed, May 15^th, 2-4 pm

· Wed, May 22^nd, 9-11 am

June

· Tues, June 4^th, 11 am-1 pm

· Wed, June 12^th, 11 am-1 pm

(please bring your own lunch)

· Thurs, June 6^th, 2-4 pm

· Fri, June 7^th, 8-10 am

· Tues, June 11^th, 2-4 pm

Q: What if I attended training in 2011 or 2012?
A: Individual training is valid for three years but you are welcome to attend workshops yearly as a review all years the company you work for is part of the program.

Q: How do I sign up?
A: Please contact Kristina by email (ssinvasives@gmail.com) or phone (604-698-8334) with the workshop you'd like to attend at least one week before the course date.

Download info sheets on 2013 Invasive-free Certification program (pdf 478 kb)

Download contact sheet for Invasive-free Certified companies (pdf 213 kb)

Download 2013 committment & registration form for companies (pdf 335 kb)

The SSISC thanks the Community Foundation of Whistler for making this program possible.

Gardeners have a long tradition of moving plants to new regions, and the popularity of gardening has increased the importation of plants into Canada and BC from other regions of the world. The Sea to Sky Corridor’s range of climates — from the coastal climate around Squamish, to the varied interior climate around Pemberton — allow gardeners to grow a wide range of interesting trees, shrubs and flowers. Some plants that are sown or planted in gardens with ideal growing conditions, but without the plant’s natural pests and predators, are able to easily spread through their fruits, seeds or roots. Invasive plants are non-native and have the potential to pose substantial undesirable or detrimental impacts including:

· Biodiversity loss - including rare & endangered species

· Habitat loss - for wildlife, birds, fish and other organisms

· Harm to human and/or animal health - can be toxic

· Significant reductions in the quality & quantity of crops

· Increased wildfire risk

· Reduced land values

· Increased erosion & stream sedimentation

One species of major concern is Japanese knotweed. In the United Kingdom, Japanese knotweed reduces property values and in some cases, people have been unable to secure a mortgage or insure their property due to knotweed infestations. It is conceivably only a matter of time before this is the case within the Sea to Sky corridor. Early detection and control is the best way to mitigate damage, one reason to work with Invasive-free Certified horticulture professionals.

In response to the threat of Japanese knotweed and also giant hogweed, the SSISC piloted a new Cost Sharing Program for Private Lands program. This program is rebating private landowners up to 50% of the cost of control of both giant hogweed & Japanese knotweed, two of the highest priority invasive species in the corridor and recently added to the BC Weed Control Act.

To ensure quality of work, in order to qualify for reimbursement all treatment must be carried out by a SSISC Invasive-free Certified company. Funding for this program was also generously provided by the Community Foundation of Whistler and treated infestations of Japanese knotweed in Squamish, Pemberton and Britannia Beach, and giant hogweed infestations have been controlled in Squamish and Britannia Beach. This program may return in 2013, funding permitting.

What participating companies had to say about the Invasive-free Certification program:

Heike Stippler from Heike Designs: “As a company I can advertise and act confidently that we care and act according to our certification commitments. We have been identifying invasive plants on several sites, reporting them and educating clients and owners along the way. My crew has brochures in their trucks and hand them out where needed, hopefully raising awareness and promoting removal and replacement. Several owners approached us to help inform and remove where appropriate. I hope to increase awareness so much more, and see great potential for future work in so many areas. At this point, it still takes a lot of pro-active approach and education, but the work required to remove and replace invasive plants that is coming out of this is just starting to show. We will be back for upgrades to the certification and continue to include this in all our professional work,”

Bryce Anderson from Whistler Landscaping: “The Invasive-free Certification Program offered by the Sea to Sky Invasive Species Council has been a valuable educational resource for our company and its employees. The tools provided in the program including detailed reference materials and separate disposal for invasive plants have been very helpful. As part of our overall goal to be as environmentally responsible as possible Whistler Landscaping is proud to be Invasive-free Certified and help minimize the negative impacts caused by invasive species in our area.”

Kris Latham from Latham Landscapes: "Staff really appreciated the practical format of the Invasive-free Certification workshop and now we’re better able to inform clients and assist in reducing the problems caused by invasive species; the more we can educate the better."

Invasive snakehead fish found in Burnaby

Wed, 23 May 2012 11:46:00 -0500

A predatory Asian fish known as 'snakehead' was spotted in Central Park's pond in Burnaby. For full article see: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/invasive-snakehead-fish-found-in-bc-park-lagoon/article2435234/

Welcome to summer student Mitchel

Wed, 23 May 2012 11:04:00 -0500

Welcome to summer student Mitchel Martin Downie who is studying at Quest University. Martin will be working with us on a variety of projects this summer, and this photo was taken of him helping out at the RMOW free waste disposal days over the long weekend. Mitchel was helping community members separate invasive plants and cedar from their clean yard waste to dispose of in a separate bin. You should never compost invasive plants since that is one way they can be spread. All year long there is a safe invasive disposal bin at the Whistler transfer station.

Rose Park weed pull Squamish

Mon, 23 Apr 2012 11:26:00 -0500

Thanks to all who came out to the weed pull at Rose Park in Squamish where we tackled english ivy and Himalayan blackberry. Great work!

See more photos...

SSISC Invasive-free certification program

Tue, 03 Apr 2012 14:17:00 -0500

Invasive species are a growing threat in the Sea to Sky Corridor, and the horticulture industry plays a key role in minimizing the risks. Last year the Sea to Sky Invasive Species Council (SSISC) ran a successful pilot Invasive-free certification program, which originated at the suggestion of the industry at a 2010 horticulture forum.

After the 2011 pilot program, this is what some participants had to say about the program: “Overall the workshop was clear & concise with good topics”; “I like that this course brings the horticulture industry to the table to try a more direct approach to voluntary compliance”; and “For me the disposal information was very important”. We’d like to thank all the companies that participated in 2011 (Alchemist Landscape Design & Management, Budial Resource Group, Coyote Landscape Contracting, Deeply Rooted Landscaping, Heike Designs, Latham Landscapes, Marie's Mountainview Garden, Paulette French Design, Sound Garden Landscape Design, Whistler Landscaping) and invite others to participate as the awareness of invasive species as an issue grows. Please keep reading to learn about updates to the program this year and other new developments.

Why should my company participate?

The goal of this program is to promote and integrate effective invasive species management into the practices of horticulture and landscape companies serving the Sea to Sky corridor. Professional development will be provided to participating companies to improve their knowledge in the following three areas:

Species Recognition and Procurement Practices – ensuring products purchased or grown are not invasive
Site & Species Appropriate Control Methods – ensuring a base understanding of the types of control methods available to control a given species
Disposal Practices – ensuring that invasive plant seeds or plant parts are properly disposed of, including ensuring integrity of the compost stream

New developments

In the United Kingdom, Japanese knotweed reduces property values and in some cases, people have been unable to secure a mortgage or insure their property due to knotweed infestations. It is conceivably only a matter of time before this is the case within the Sea to Sky corridor. Early detection and control is the best way to mitigate damage, and this course will provide participants with a full understanding of the issue that they can then pass on to clients.

Also, the SSISC is piloting a new Cost Sharing Program for Private Lands program this year that provides land owners, managers, and occupiers with the guidance and financial resources necessary to manage invasive plants on private property. This program will rebate private landowners up to 50% of the cost of control of giant hogweed & Japanese knotweed, two of the highest priority invasive species in the corridor and recently added to the BC Weed Control Act. To ensure quality of work, in order to qualify for reimbursement all treatment must be carried out by a SSISC Invasive-free Certified company (or the SSISC itself if no certified companies are available). If this Cost Sharing Program carries on in future years, we’d like to see all control be completed by local companies or contractors.

Frequently asked questions

Q:Who can take part in the program?
A: Although it is designed for those in the horticulture industry (garden centres, nurseries, landscapers, landscape architects) and contractors, anyone if welcome to register.

Q:What defines certification?
A: A company is certified ‘Invasive-free Certified’ when a minimum of 50% of staff have completed the ‘Invasive-free’ training, including all crew leaders/supervisors, and the company has signed a statement of commitment. For individuals to complete the training, they must have participated in at least one introductory workshop (or equivalent training) and signed a statement of commitment.

Q:What is the cost? (Note: The annual fee covers the costs of the program and is not a revenue generator)
A: Cost is dependent on size of company: Companies that are up to 10 employees/11-20 employees/over 20 employees will pay $50/$100/$150 respectively per year to be certified. For individuals not part of a company working towards certification, the cost to take part is $20. When a company is working towards securing/maintaining certification, there is no limit on how many staff members can attend training in that year. Cost also includes:

all resources, including a print copy of ‘A Guide to Identification and Management of Sea to Sky Invasive Plants’
year round support to all participating businesses to help them reach the commitments of the program
electronic certificates & Invasive-free certified stickers
electronic letter to give clients about the value of being certified
recognition on our website and in correspondence/ads relating to the program

Q:How long is certification valid?
A: Companies need to re-certify annually; individual training is valid for 3 years. Annual certification is important since it keeps companies involved and up to date on new information including news about treatment, emerging invasive species, and new legislation/regulations.

Q:When are the workshops?
A: Participants need to attend just one 2 hour workshop (classroom style) offered in Squamish, Whistler or Pemberton. Availability is on a first come first served basis with additional workshops being added as needed.

Squamish

@ Capilano University

Whistler

@ RMOW Public Works Yard

Pemberton

@ Community Centre

April

·Wed, April 25^th, 9 -11 am

·Thur, April 26^th, 2-4 pm

·Wed, April 25^th, 2-4 pm

·Fri, April 27^th, 8-10 am

·Tues, April 24^th, 9-11am

May

·Tues, May 15^th, 2-4 pm

·Fri, May 18^th, 9-11 am

·Wed, May 16^th, 2-4 pm

·Thurs, May 17^th, 8-10 am

·Tues, May 15^th, 9-11 am

June

·Tues, June 5^th, 9-11 am

·Wed, June 6^th, 2-4 pm

·Tues, June 5^th, 2-4 pm

·Fri, June 8^th, 8-10 am

·Wed, June 6^th, 9-11 am

Q:What if I attended training in 2011?
A: Individual training will be valid through 2013. Your company will need to re-certify annually, i.e. confirm participation in the program & number of trained staff, and pay the annual fee (see above “What is the cost?”).

Q: How do I sign up?
A: Please contact Kristina by email or phone 604-698-8334 with the workshop you'd like to attend within one week of the course date.

Download pdf (326 kb)

Young Canada works summer hire

Tue, 03 Apr 2012 14:03:00 -0500

We're looking to hire two Field and Outreach Assistants as part of the Young Canada Work program. During spring and summer months we conduct field work as well as the majority of its education and engagement programs, and these two positions will assist in these activities. Positions will be dependent on receiving funding through the Young Canada Works program and all candidates must meet program requirements. Deadline is April 20th. Job listing...

AGM and Forum Announcement

Sun, 01 Apr 2012 18:30:00 -0500

The Sea to Sky invasive Species Council (SSISC) is inviting community members to its upcoming AGM and forum, which will feature the latest updates from the corridor, neighbouring regions and the province. This free event is on Tuesday, April 17^th, from 1 – 4 pm at Totem Hall in Squamish, 1380 Stawamus Road (across from Chances on hwy 99).

If you’re interested in being more involved or staying updated, this event is a great way to meet others with similar interests and for finding out what’s new. Volunteer opportunities include joining one of our committees, becoming an Advisor, or taking on a more formal Director position.

The forum will include short updates from in and around the region, starting with a short summary of the work done by the Council in 2011 and 2012 activities. 2012 activities highlighted will include the pilot ‘Cost Share program’ for invasive control on private and the SISSC Invasive-free Certification program. Updates from local partners will include: the Village of Lions Bay, on their efforts controlling giant hogweed; the Squamish River Watershed Society; the District of Squamish; Heike Designs, a local ‘Invasive-free Certified’ company; the Resort Municipality of Whistler; and Squamish Nation.

Provincial partners providing updates will include: the Ministry of Forest, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, BC Parks and the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. Invasive committees from neighbouring regions that work closely with the SSISC will also be on hand to give short updates on what else is happening on the invasive front around the south coast. They include the Fraser Valley, Metro Vancouver and the Lillooet Region Invasive Species Society.

For more information on the event or on the Sea to Sky Invasive Species Council contact us via email or call 604-935-7665. RSVP is appreciated by not required. The SSISC would like to thank the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure for sponsoring this event.

Download Agenda (275 kb)

Pilot rebate program for invasive plant control on private land

Mon, 12 Mar 2012 13:16:00 -0500

Do you have invasive plants on your property? Help is here! With the growing season soon upon us, the Sea to Sky Invasive Species Council (SSISC) is announcing a Pilot Cost Sharing Program for Private Lands with generous funding from the Community Foundation of Whistler. This program provides land owners, managers, and occupiers throughout the Sea to Sky Corridor with the guidance, support and financial resources necessary to manage invasive plants.

This pilot program will rebate private landowners up to 50% of the cost of control of giant hogweed & Japanese knotweed, two of the highest priority invasive species in the corridor and recently added to the BC Weed Control Act. Giant hogweed, which containspoisonous sap, is a serious health threat. The sap sensitizes skin to ultraviolet radiation and results in severe burns and may cause temporary or permanent blindness.

Japanese knotweed, on the other hand, can have serious environmental and economic impacts. This extremely aggressive plant can devastate riparian systems, degrade native plant and wildlife habitat, be a safety concern along roadways (affecting sightlines) and damage infrastructure. In the United Kingdom, Japanese knotweed reduces property values and in some cases, people have been unable to secure a mortgage or insure their property due to knotweed infestations. It is conceivably only a matter of time before this is the case within the Sea to Sky corridor. Early detection and control is the best way to mitigate damage.

This program targets private land owners since this is a great opportunity to address those individuals who really don’t know who to turn to with the issue and involve them positively. Public lands are still an issue; however we do already have partners responsible for those lands, be they municipalities, the province or utility lands. If we are successful, then we have educated people on the importance of the issue, which in turn puts more pressure on public land managers to be more pro-active.

DETAILS

Maximum rebates are $500 - $1,000, depending on size of property and sensitivity of location, and are issued based on funding availability and the order the applications are received. Conditions that would need to be met to qualify for the rebate include:

Contacting SSISC no later than June 1, 2012 for appointment to determine maximum rebate/scope of work
Invasive plants treated are giant hogweed and/or Japanese knotweed
All treatment must be carried out by a SSISC Invasive-free Certified company or the SSISC itself (See list of Certified companies below)
Any herbicide treatment must additionally be done by a Certified Licensed Pesticide Applicator & follow all local bylaws
The treatment area must be within SLRD electoral areas C & D (includes Squamish, Whistler and Pemberton) or Lions Bay

SSISC Invasive-free Certified horticulture companies in the Sea to Sky Corridor that took part in the 2011 pilot program include:

2011 SSISC Invasive-free Certified horticulture companies in the Sea to Sky Corridor*

Alchemist Landscape Design & Management                Budial Resource Group Ltd.
Coyote Landscape Contracting                                       Deeply Rooted Landscaping
Heike Designs Inc.                                                           Latham Landscapes Ltd
Marie's Mountainview Garden                                          Paulette French Design
Sound Garden Landscape Design Ltd.                            Whistler Landscaping

*Additional companies have already signed up for 2012 Invasive-free certification so stay tuned for an expanded list of horticulture companies that qualify to be part of the program. This stipulation to hire Invasive-free certified companies is to ensure quality and consistency of work. If this program expands in future years, the SSISC would like to see all control be completed by local companies or contractors.

HOW DO I APPLY?

We welcome your efforts to manage and control invasive plants on privately owned and managed lands! To apply, either fill out and submit a ‘Request for Assistance Form’, or contact SSISC at 604-698-8334 or by email before June 1^st. After submitting your application, a representative from SSISC will contact you.

2011 Summary

Wed, 07 Mar 2012 15:41:00 -0600

Thanks to everyone who made 2011 a success. For a summary report of our 2011 accomplishments, please download the following report (500 KB). We're gearing up for spring, please stay tuned for our upcoming programs and activities.

Japanese knotweed and residential property

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 13:24:00 -0600

The Royal Institution of chartered surveyors published a paper to help residential practitioners consider the implications of a Japanese Knotweed intrusion on or near a dwelling, when undertaking valuations of residential property in the UK. Residents in BC also struggle with Japanese knotweed and the paper should be useful to property owners, real estate agents, mortgage brokers and surveyors who have to deal with this plant. CONCLUSION: THIS PLANT MAY AFFECT THE VALUE OF YOUR PROPERTY AND EARLY DETECTION AND CONTROL IS THE BEST WAY TO MITIGATE DAMAGE.

Web site for full paper can be accessed: https://consultations.rics.org/consult.ti/japaneseknotweed/viewCompoundDoc?docid=1228212&sessionid=&voteid=&partId=1228212

Contents

RICS information papers

This is an information paper. Information papers are intended to provide information and explanation to RICS members on specific topics of relevance to the profession. The function of this paper is not to recommend or advise on professional procedure to be followed by members.

It is, however, relevant to professional competence to the extent that members should be up to date and have knowledge of information papers within a reasonable time of their coming into effect.

Members should note that when an allegation of professional negligence is made against a surveyor, a court or tribunal is likely to take account of any relevant information papers published by RICS in deciding whether or not the member has acted with reasonable competence.

1. Scope

1.1 This information paper (IP) aims to help residential practitioners consider the implications of a Japanese Knotweed intrusion on or near a dwelling, when undertaking valuations of residential property in the UK.

1.2 The IP includes reference to the main UK legislative and regulatory provisions that affect, or are considered likely to affect, residential value. Although these legislative and regulatory frameworks differ between England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, the essential features governing Japanese Knotweed control and disposal are broadly similar.

1.3 This IP describes the nature of the Japanese Knotweed problem, the scale of the damage the plant can cause, and outlines the main methods of treatment. The paper puts forward an assessment methodology to help valuers objectively describe the scale of Knotweed intrusions, allowing other stakeholders to make balanced and measured decisions. In addition, Appendix C includes an illustrated 'on-site' identification chart designed to help residential practitioners recognize Japanese Knotweed at all the different seasons of the year.

1.4 This IP should be read in conjunction with the latest edition of the RICS Valuation Standards - Global and UK (the 'Red Book'). However, its scope extends beyond valuations conducted in accordance with the standards. Therefore, residential practitioners are encouraged to take note of this IP when carrying out the following professional services:

preparing valuations for the purposes of agency;
providing RICS Condition and HomeBuyer Reports;
Single Surveys in Scotland, and
building surveys.

1.5 Important note:

The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 originally included only giant hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum) and Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica). However, in April 2010 a further 36 plants were added onto Schedule 9. For further information on these other invasive species, please visit the website of the GB non native species at tps://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/nonnativespecies/home/index.cfm

2. Introduction

2.1 The Japanese Knotweed problem

2.1.1 Japanese Knotweed is a hardy bamboo-like perennial plant that grows quickly and strongly. It spreads through its underground rhizomes or roots and thick clumps or stands can quickly grow to a height of over two metres. It was introduced into the UK in the mid-19^th century and was initially popular with landscapers because of its ability to grow quickly and form dense screens. However, it soon became a problem because of its ability to out-compete indigenous flora and their associated fauna. In 1905 the Royal Horticultural Society was warning its readers against planting Knotweed in their gardens unless '...it is kept in check' and even the famous landscaper Gertrude Jekyll advised that it should be '...planted with caution'.

2.1.2 During the first half of the 20^th Century, the spread of Japanese Knotweed beyond the original landscaped gardens was broadly known yet many nurseries still sold the plant until the early 1930s. East Cornwall was particularly badly affected where the price of a house was reputedly reduced by £100 because of the plant (Bailey JP, Connolly AP 2000).

Eventually the government took action. Japanese Knotweed was included in the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, making it an offence to 'plant or otherwise cause Japanese knotweed to grow in the wild'

2.1.3 In the last few years this uneasy relationship with the plant became more of a problem when some lenders reviewed their policies. A number of loans on properties affected by Japanese Knotweed were declined. Several of these cases became prominent news stories, changing the status of Knotweed from a complication that was simply 'difficult to solve' to one that could result in property sales failing.

2.1.4 However, the residential property market has faced controversial issues before. Since the mid-1970s the problems of building movement, high alumina cement, asbestos, prefabricated concrete buildings, lead, radon, and electromagnetic fields have presented assessment difficulties that have been largely resolved and assimilated into the lending process. There is no reason why the assessment of Japanese Knotweed cannot follow a similar route.

2.1.5 For the purposes of this paper, 'Japanese Knotweed' refers to all types of Japanese Knotweed defined by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

2.2 The Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) and the Building Societies Association (BSA)

2.2.1 The members of the CML and the BSA account for the majority of UK residential mortgage lending. Both represent the views of their members, but neither can impose policies. When the Japanese Knotweed problem became apparent, the CML consulted its members. It did not publish a formal policy, but it was clear that there was a general reluctance to lend on Knotweed-affected properties. However, some individual lenders are willing to consider applications on a case-by-case basis once remediation works have been implemented. Although conditions will vary in practice, these lenders will generally want to see evidence of:

an initial treatment; and
a commitment by the owner of the property to fund, in advance, a three- or four-year treatment programme effective against Japanese Knotweed.

2.2.2 Individual lenders adopt policies that reflect their own commercial priorities. The variation in approach across the sector presents a challenge for registered valuers, especially those who carry out mortgage valuations for several different lenders.

2.3 Insurance companies

2.3.1 Discussions with the Association of British Insurers (ABI) and some insurance companies revealed the following:

Insurers do not generally ask any specific questions about Japanese Knotweed when a homeowner applies for a building insurance policy.
Although it is not specifically excluded, most buildings insurance policies do not cover damage and problems caused by Japanese Knotweed. Additionally, because the damage occurs gradually, it is unlikely to be covered in the future.
Where Japanese Knotweed originates from a neighbouring property, insurance companies are likely to pursue others for the costs of the damage caused.
A number of lenders claim that they are unable to obtain insurance cover for property affected by Japanese Knotweed.

2.3.2 This can leave a homebuyer in a difficult situation where their preferred lender will not grant a mortgage unless the homebuyer can secure a building insurance policy that covers damage caused by Japanese Knotweed; but the homebuyer cannot get an insurance policy that does.

2.3.3 Consequently, lenders and owners may need to tackle the problems posed by Knotweed without the support of building insurance policies.

3. The scale of the problem

3.1 How much of a problem does Japanese Knotweed really cause?

3.1.1 Japanese Knotweed has caused problems in the residential market because of concerns about the damaging effects of this invasive plant. However, these concerns are often based on misunderstanding and overreactions. Below, we explore the extent of the damage that can be caused.

3.2 Japanese Knotweed damage - the worst case scenario

If we define the level of damage that most commentators would consider 'serious', it can help residential practitioners be less susceptible to misinformation and so make balanced judgements. This section describes 'serious' damage and section 4.6 estimates the likely cost of this type of damage.

3.2.1 The most common effects and affected areas include the following.

Drains and other buried services: Knotweed roots can exploit existing cracks and gaps in the pipes in their search for water, which will further damage and, in some cases, block the drains. Large, densely packed clumps or 'stands' of Japanese Knotweed can disrupt drain runs. In the worst cases, the drains must be renewed.
Patios, paths and drives: Japanese Knotweed can exploit poorly laid surfacing, grow between slabs and movement joints of concrete drives and disrupt brick paving. Repairs can involve the removal of the existing paving and bedding, eradication of the plant, removal of the disruptive crowns and roots and replacement of the path, patio or drive.
Boundary and retaining walls: closely packed stands can undermine garden walls with shallow foundations. The mass of the stands can 'push over' retaining walls, often resulting in sudden collapse.
Outbuildings: vigorous stands of Japanese Knotweed can overwhelm lightweight, insubstantial and poorly founded outbuildings such as garden sheds, greenhouses and poorly built garages.
Conservatories: although the effects will be similar to those described for outbuildings, owners and valuers usually attribute greater importance to these structures; thus, Knotweed-affected conservatories may affect value.
Gardens: the invasive nature of the plant can ruin well-planned and well-stocked gardens. Some owners spend tens of thousands of pounds on renovating and redesigning outside spaces, including sophisticated water features and bespoke outbuildings. Japanese Knotweed can spoil much of this.

3.2.2 Additionally, the Environmental Protection Act 1990 contains a number of legal provisions that designate Knotweed-contaminated soil as 'controlled' waste. Only properly licensed organisations may remove this waste from a property and they must take it to appropriately licensed waste facilities. This can have serious implications for owners who want to develop their property. In properties affected by Knotweed, large amounts of contaminated soil are likely to result from activities such as:

adding an extension to the main building;
redesigning the garden; and
maintaining and repairing the property following a Knotweed invasion (for example, re-laying paths and drains).

The need for licensed removal of this contaminated soil and any dead plant material will obviously add to the cost of the work.

3.2.3 There are some claims that Japanese Knotweed can result in damage that is more dramatic to buildings, including damage to foundations and plants forcing their way into habitable spaces of dwellings. These extreme problems are thankfully very rare and exceptional.

4. Effective treatment of Japanese Knotweed

4.1 Introduction

4.1.1 Once it is established, getting rid of Japanese Knotweed can be challenging. As the Royal Horticultural Society states on its website: 'eradication requires steely determination'. Below we review the different treatment options and evaluate their suitability for use in the residential setting.

4.2 Excavation of the plant and its roots

4.2.1 Knotweed-infested soils can be excavated and removed to an off-site, appropriately licensed, waste-management facility.

4.2.2 The volume of excavated soils can extend to 3m vertically and 7m horizontally from the above-ground growth, resulting in large volumes of waste soil. Disposal costs range from £25 to £50 per tonne (not including landfill tax), with the result that excavation of even a relatively small Knotweed infestation can cost several thousand pounds in waste charges alone. Typically, off-site disposal can result in total treatment costs in excess of £10,000.

4.2.3 However, it is possible to reduce the volume of Knotweed-infested waste soils by segregating rhizomes and crowns (see Appendix B for definitions of these terms). There are a variety of picking, sorting and screening techniques that can achieve this.

4.3 On-site burial and/or encapsulation with membranes

4.3.1 Knotweed can be excavated and then buried on-site, but unless it can be covered with 5m or more of overburden, a specialist root barrier membrane should be installed to fully or partially encapsulate the Knotweed-bound soil, to prevent any regrowth. A root barrier membrane can also be used to encapsulate Knotweed where space does not allow burial at all.

4.3.2 One on-site burial technique is the use of vertical barriers to prevent Knotweed crossing boundaries. This is a popular approach if adjoining landowners are not co-operating with a cross-boundary programme to treat Knotweed infestation. However, vigorous Knotweed growths can often breach vertical root barrier membranes unless they are several metres deep and this should not therefore be relied upon as an effective treatment on its own.

4.4 Biological control

4.4.1 Biological control involves the introduction of a 'pest' species that will attack and control the target 'host' species (in this case, the Knotweed). It is effectively a grazing system, whereby the growth of the Knotweed is controlled to a level that keeps it in check. Biological control does not result in the death of the Knotweed, as this would be counterproductive to the pest species that feeds on it.

4.4.2 A trial is currently underway using a Japanese sap-sucking insect, which could prove an effective biological control agent for Japanese Knotweed. However, it is unlikely that this will change current legislation on the issue.

4.5 Chemical control

4.5.1 Chemical control is the application of specialised herbicides to Knotweed plants over a period of several growing seasons. This is often the cheapest treatment option costing between £3,000 and £5,000 in total for a typical three-bedroom semi-detached house. However, this method can take more than three years to be effective.

4.5.2 In a residential context where space is limited and property boundaries are closely located, planned and managed chemical control is the only realistic option for most properties in terms of practicality, cost and the need to satisfy lender requirements.

4.6 The costs of effective treatment

4.6.1 When preparing a valuation, the registered valuer must account for a variety of issues and factors. Where Knotweed affects a property, the valuer requires a measure of the magnitude of the problem. An estimate of the cost of eradication and subsequent repair can provide this.

4.6.2 Figure 1 shows a garden of a three-bedroom, semi-detached house in a suburban location in a medium-sized British city. It is assumed to be in a satisfactory condition, but has been affected by a large stand of Japanese Knotweed. This is approximately four metres from the rear wall of the house, with the red dotted line showing the extent of the above-ground growth. The stand and its growth has:

blocked and damaged the rear drain and inspection chamber;
disrupted the rear patio, leaving many uneven paving slabs;
damaged the concrete slab beneath the greenhouse and distorted the metal frame;
damaged several panels of the woven timber boundary fence; and weakened the poorly built garage to the extent that it is now beyond repair.

4.6.3 To simplify the scenario, we will assume the neighbour will co-operate with the treatment scheme and meet their share of any costs.

4.6.4 In addition to the price of repairing the damage, the costs of a four-year chemical-control treatment programme by a specialist contractor is assumed to be £3,000- £5,000. A further sum of £750 is required to cover legal and professional fees for initial advice on the problem.

4.6.5 Using the Building Cost Information Service (BCIS) figures published by RICS, total remediation costs are likely to be as indicated below.

Repair	Cost (£)
Drain replacement	1,913
New patio	1,872
New greenhouse	1,070
Part fence replacement	108
New garage	4,700
Treatment costs	5,000
Legal and professional fees	750
Total	£15,413 plus VAT

4.6.6 In most situations, the case we have illustrated in Figure One is as bad as Knotweed gets in a domestic situation. Once there is a broad acknowledgement that most Japanese knotweed intrusions are less troublesome than this and can be controlled without prohibitive costs, Knotweed can be considered as just one of the many factors that have to be taken into account when preparing a valuation.

4.6.7 Important note: The above amounts do not include the removal and disposal off-site of any contaminated excavated material which would increase the costs further.

4.7 Impact on value

4.7.1 By quantifying the likely cost of treatment and any necessary repairs in this way, the impact of Japanese Knotweed can be taken into account in the valuation process and reflected in the same way as any other defect or item of disrepair.

4.7.2 Once there is an acknowledgement that the illustrated case is about as big as it gets, that Japanese Knotweed is unlikely to cause serious structural damage to buildings and that it can be controlled in a domestic context without incurring prohibitive costs, it can start to be considered as just one of the many factors to be taken into account when preparing a valuation.

4.7.3 If treatment is deemed necessary in cases where Knotweed is present in the grounds but no damage has been caused to the property itself, the sole expense may simply be the cost of the treatment. In some circumstances, this may have no adverse affect on value.

5. An assessment framework for Japanese Knotweed

5.1 Introduction

5.1.1 An assessment of the seriousness of any problem affecting a residential property is usually carried out in three stages:

collection of information about the nature and extent of the problem;
analysis of this information so that the magnitude of the issue can be established; and
the use of this assessment as a basis for client advice.

5.2 Collection of information

5.2.1 Information is collected through inspection. The inspection process can be subdivided into the following parts:

Knowledge of the area and pre-inspection checks

5.2.2 Local knowledge and pre-inspection checks can help the valuer identify general neighbourhood features regularly associated with the growth of Japanese Knotweed. Such pre-inspection checks may include postal-code searches for flood risk and other environmental issues, the use of mapping and 'street view' sources. Neighbourhood features associated with the growth of Knotweed typically include the presence of:

local water sources, such as culverts, ponds, canals and lakes;
public and private paths, cycle-paths, roads, railway or underground railway embankments, dual carriageways and motorways;
large open spaces, car parks and cleared sites; and
commercial and industrial buildings, workshops, storage depots and similar.

The property in its neighbourhood setting

5.2.3 All of the likely locations for Japanese Knotweed growth identified in 5.2.2 can similarly be identified prior to and after the actual inspection, for example, while driving through the neighbourhood, arriving at or leaving the property, parking, and preparing for the inspection.

The inspection of the property

5.2.4 The Red Book sets out the standard approach to the provision of valuation advice to prospective lenders in the mortgage valuation. This makes it clear that in normal circumstances, as much of the exterior of the property and the land within the ownership as is readily accessible without undue difficulty or risk to personal safety should be inspected visually. At the time of writing, the current version adds:

'Although personal judgement has to be used, this inspection should include all of the property that is visible when standing at ground level within the boundaries of the site, and adjacent public/communal areas, and when standing at the various floor levels.''

Additionally:

'Where there are locational factors that may impact value they should be recorded and reported. Certain problems, such as...invasive vegetation... are particularly prevalent in certain districts. If appropriate, the valuer should make some reference to these defects, even if the subject property does not appear to be affected at the time of the inspection.' *1

In most cases this visual inspection of the grounds of a property is relatively cursory and takes place naturally during the normal inspection process. However, in circumstances where there may be a greater risk of Japanese Knotweed, for example, where it is widespread locally, this part of the inspection may require particular attention.

If the client wants greater assurance, he or she should commission a more detailed inspection , such as a HomeBuyer Report or a building survey. Although these are not specialist Knotweed services, the inspection of the property and its grounds will be more comprehensive than with a mortgage valuation inspection and there will thus be a greater opportunity to identify any growth. In these cases, inspection along and over the boundaries is important especially where those features listed in 5.2.2 are present.

In Scotland, the extent of the inspection for a Single Survey is approximately the same as for the mortgage valuation described above.

*1 These statements may be revised in subsequent versions of the Red Book. Registered Valuers have a professional duty to use the current version.

5.3 Identification of Japanese Knotweed

5.3.1 Many authoritative publications on Japanese Knotweed have been in the public domain for a number of years; however, not all residential practitioners are confident in their ability to identify the plant.

5.3.2 To help address this problem, this information paper includes an easy-to-use identification guide for valuers, illustrated in Appendix C. Intended to be taken along on inspections, this A4-size, chronologically structured chart is divided into three sections to aid identification throughout the year.

The growing season (March-October):

March-April: at this time of year the plant will be at an early stage of its annual life cycle, and some of the classic visual characteristics will not yet have developed. Despite this, its appearance can still be distinctive. It is described and pictured at Appendix C of this IP.
May-October: during these months the growth of Knotweed will be most vigorous, and in normal circumstances the plant should be easily identifiable. This section of the Figure highlights just four characteristics:
the leaf;
the zigzag leaf stems or 'petioles';
the main stems; and
the flowers.

The winter (October-February):

In these months the plant will shed its leaves and die back. Because the stems are robust, it is possible to identify Knotweed even during this season.

However, as residential practitioners are not specialists in this area, and the mortgage valuation is tightly prescribed, there is a limit to the practitioner's identification capabilities. The following scenarios indicate some of the difficulties that may be encountered:

Concealment: Japanese Knotweed can often be hidden amongst other dense foliage or - and this is more likely - owners may deliberately conceal growth. Typical examples include the physical removal of the plant prior to the inspection; covering over with turf and mowing the lawns before inspection; covering the garden with landscape fabric and ornamental gravel or bark chippings; and so on.
Mis-identification: other vigorous growing shrubs and trees can be mistaken for Knotweed. Specialist contractors report increasing numbers of abortive visits because of 'mistaken identity'.
Effects of treatment: during a formal treatment programme, Knotweed regrowth can be so deformed and sparse that it may not be noticed.

5.4 Building an assessment framework

5.4.1 Although the focus of this information paper is on the mortgage valuation, approximately 20% of purchasers commission their own survey, such as the RICS Condition and HomeBuyer Reports and the building survey. These include a more extensive inspection and broader advice about the condition of the property.

5.4.2 Consequently, it is logical to establish an assessment framework that supports the decision-making process across the range of inspection and survey products. Once established, this framework can be flexibly utilised by stakeholders to suit their own business objectives.

5.5 The risk assessment of Japanese Knotweed

5.5.1 This risk assessment takes into account the real risk to a property and addresses some of the concerns of the lenders and insurance companies. A number of definitions may be helpful.

The term 'habitable space' refers to those parts of the subject property associated with daily living not ancillary spaces (such as outbuildings and/or garages).
The term 'serious damage' refers to a level of damage described in 3.21 and costed in 4.6;
According to the Environmental Agency's 'The Knotweed Code of Practice', Japanese Knotweed rhizomes can extend up to 7 metres from the last sign of visible growth. This has been used as the minimum distance in the assessment process.

5.5.2 Where the Knotweed intrusion falls into categories 4 and 5, further investigations are required. For categories 2 and 3, the decision as to whether further investigations are needed will be based on a combination of the valuer's professional judgement and the client's particular requirements.

5.6 Properties previously affected by Japanese Knotweed

5.6.1 Although valuers may not see Japanese Knotweed during their inspections, they may be aware that the property has been previously affected. This information may result from their knowledge of the area or as a response to a 'seller's questionnaire'.

Please note: because the standard of previous treatment regimes adopted by property owners and their agents have been inconsistent, the effectiveness of older treatment programmes must be cautiously assessed.

5.6.2 Whatever the source of the information, one of two responses may be appropriate:

where there is NO satisfactory evidence to show that Japanese Knotweed is currently undergoing a properly planned programme or that the planned programme has been properly completed, further investigations WILL be required; or
where there IS satisfactory evidence to show that Japanese Knotweed is currently undergoing a properly planned programme or that a planned programme has been properly completed, further investigations will NOT be required.

5.6.3 An important feature of this process will be the definition of what constitutes 'satisfactory evidence' and although this will be a matter for the individual residential practitioner's professional judgement, it should closely resemble the 'Management Plan' described in 5.7 below.

5.7 Management plan

5.7.1 Once Japanese Knotweed has been identified, and a specialist consultant or contractor has further investigated the problem and provided a report, a Japanese Knotweed management plan should be established. This management plan can provide the necessary reassurance to both lenders and buyers that a Knotweed problem is being properly managed.

5.7.2 Although the methods of tackling Japanese Knotweed will depend on the commercial choices and preferences of the contractor, the management plan should be based on that included in the Code of Practice published by the Environment Agency and should thus be consistent across the industry. As a minimum, a management plan should include the following features:

A description of the property with an accurate record of the Knotweed intrusion. A scaled plan with dimensions and supporting photographs would be particularly useful.
The full details of the contracting organisation and a description of the methods to be used to eradicate Knotweed.
A treatment schedule that is updated as treatments are carried out.
A completion certificate that confirms the treatment is complete and that the property is Knotweed-free on the completion date.

5.7.3 Valuers should take account of this range of information when deciding whether the evidence of previous treatment regimes is adequate.

5.7.4 To meet lender requirements, other features could provide additional reassurance, as detailed below.

The current owner must pay all costs associated with the management plan 'up-front', so that the treatment programme can be completed without relying on financial support from subsequent owners.
The management plan should be transferable to any subsequent owners.
The management plan should cover the whole of the property and not just those affected parts identified by the original valuer.
An insurance-backed guarantee for the management plan should ideally be obtained, to reassure lenders, insurance companies and buyers further. Such a guarantee should ensure that in the case of insolvency of the original treatment company, another suitable company will complete the treatment programme.

5.7.5 Important note: It is impractical to guarantee that Japanese Knotweed will not return following the completion of a treatment programme. Consequently, the mandatory insurance should be restricted to ensuring that the treatment is completed.

5.8 Contractors and consultants

5.8.1 As standards develop across the treatment industry, it is likely that lenders will begin to specify that the management plan provider is an accredited member of a recognised trade association. At the time of writing a suitably constituted trade association is not yet in existence, although related discussions are taking place within the treatment industry.

5.8.2 Until a suitable trade association is established, a Japanese Knotweed contractor or consultant appointed to carry out an effective treatment programme should be able to show they have many of the following attributes:

a transparent fee structure that allows the total cost of the treatment programme to be understood and agreed before any works take place;
a contract for the works accompanied by a warranty that the treatment programme will be completed. This should be for a suitable period of not less than six years from the start of the works;
a bond for the warrantee to provide protection if the warranter ceases trading during the warranty period;
a commitment to regular monitoring for and treatment of regrowth of Knotweed (this would usually be for at least three years, although a longer period might be necessary);
appropriate legal compliance for the works, including:
certification from the National Proficiency Tests Council (NPTC) for the application of herbicides;
licences for waste-handling and treatment (such as a duty of care licence, a waste carrier licence, a waste broker license and an environmental permit, including mobile plant licences for large items of treatment plant);
possible additional approval from the Environment Agency for the following:
herbicide spraying close to a watercourse;
excavating close to a watercourse; and
burial of Knotweed material on site;
an appropriate consideration, risk assessment and action plan for the treatment of Knotweed on adjacent properties where it could affect the warranted property;
proof of the following, annual insurances:
professional indemnity cover of not less than £2m;
employers' liability cover of not less than £10m; and
public liability cover of not less than £5m;
preferably current accreditations from the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) for the following standards:
OHSAS 18001 Occupational Health and Safety;
ISO 9001: 2008 Quality Management Systems - Requirements; and
ISO 14001 Environmental Management System.

5.9 Neighbouring properties

5.9.1 Where the Japanese Knotweed is confined to the grounds of a single property, its eradication will normally be a straightforward process involving only two parties: the property owner and the contractor. However, where Knotweed straddles the boundaries of a number of different properties, the solution will not be so simple. Although the owner of the subject property may have paid for a treatment programme, if the owners of the neighbouring properties do not co-operate, the treatment is unlikely to be effective. In some residential areas property ownership can be complex and transient and establishing a joint strategy in this situation will be challenging. In these cases, providing root barriers along the boundary may appear an attractive option to lenders who require a straightforward, time-limited solution. However, this approach will be unsuitable for many properties for two reasons:

The disruption of excavations to depths of three metres will be expensive, disruptive and legally challenging, as the owner's legal advisers take into account matters relating to boundaries, party walls and general property rights.
Not all commentators agree that root barriers are effective ways of preventing the spread of Knotweed (see 4.3.2 for further discussion).

5.9.2 Consequently, where Knotweed is present on a neighbouring property or land, two strategies can be adopted:

Where the Knotweed is on both the subject and neighbouring property, the management plan should include:
provision for the treatment of the entire outbreak, regardless of boundary positions; and
a project management service in which the contractor will co-ordinate plans with willing neighbouring owners regarding access for the inspection and treatment regimes.
Where a neighbouring owner does not co-operate and prevents the completion of the treatment programme, the new owner of the subject property may have to commit to a continued treatment programme that will restrict the growth of Knotweed on the subject property until a cross-boundary, co-ordinated treatment programme can be agreed.
Conversely, where the neighbouring owner is the lead party in the management plan, the residential practitioner will want to remind the client that they should cooperate and failure to do so may expose them to legal action for negligence

5.9.3 To protect the legal interests of the subject property owner, his or her legal advisers may wish to put adjacent owners on notice of the problem, indicating what should be done to tackle the Knotweed and the possible consequences of failing to take appropriate action.

6. Conclusion

6.1 The presence and effects of Japanese Knotweed are just one of the many considerations that may affect value and just one of the variety of factors that valuers must take into account when assessing Market Value. While this invasive, non-native plant can be difficult to control, it should be recognised that timely and persistent treatment programmes can minimise its impact. As the treatment industry develops and matures, it is hoped that valuers will be able to provide more informed advice to their clients. As lenders adopt more consistent and balanced policies Japanese Knotweed should soon become just one more consideration in the complex valuation process.

Appendix A: Further sources of information

Further information on Japanese Knotweed and related issues can be found on the following websites:

The Environment Agency (www.environment-agency.gov.uk )

The Cornwall Knotweed Forum ( www.cornwall.gov.uk)

Devon County Council (www.devon.gov.uk)

GB non-native species secretariat (https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/nonnativespecies)

Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (www.sepa.org.uk)

Appendix B: Glossary

Included in this glossary are both terms referred to in the information paper and other commonly used terms that the valuer may encounter when undertaking desk research or investigations to support residential valuations.

Term	Definition
Canes .	Tall, hollow, bamboo-like stems
Crown	The visible part of the rhizome from which canes grow. Crowns can produce many new canes and, because of their size, can be resistant to burning or drying out.
Environmental Protection Act 1990	Part II of the EPA 1990 contains a number of legal provisions concerning 'controlled waste'. Any soil or plant material contaminated with Japanese knotweed that a person discards, intends to discard or is required to discard is likely to be classified as controlled waste. The most relevant provisions are in sections 33 and 34 of the Act.
Japanese Knotweed	The common type of Japanese Knotweed is known as Fallopia japonica, but there is a smaller compact variety called Fallopia japonica var. compacta, which reaches a height of 1 metre. Giant Knotweed (Fallopia sachalinensis), can grow up to 5 metres and a hybrid between Japanese Knotweed and Giant Knotweed, Fallopia x bohemica, is also found in the UK.
Petiole	The stalk or stem that connects the leaf to the plant
Registered valuer	This is a chartered surveyor and member of the RICS who is registered with the RICS to carry out the valuation of land and property.
Residential practitioner	In the context of this information paper, 'residential practitioner' refers to a broad range of professionals involved with advising their clients about all types of residential property.
Rhizome	Underground stem which enables Japanese Knotweed to survive over winter, when the canes die back. Small sections of rhizome, as little as 0.7g, can regrow into a new plant.
Stands	Large clumps of densely packed Knotweed stems.
Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994	The WMLR 1994 describe 'waste relevant objectives' in paragraph 4 of Schedule 4. These objectives require that waste is recovered or disposed of 'without endangering human health and without using processes or methods which could harm the environment and in particular without risk to water, air, soil, plants or animals; or causing nuisance through noise or odours; or adversely affecting the countryside or places of special interest.'
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981	Section 14(2) of this Act states that 'if any person plants or otherwise causes to grow in the wild any plant which is included in Part II of Schedule 9, he shall be guilty of an offence.' Japanese Knotweed is one of the plants listed in the Schedule.

The Science of Felt

Mon, 09 Jan 2012 12:00:00 -0600

A look at the science driving the move to eliminate the use of felt soled waders

Bob Wiltshire
Center for Aquatic Nuisance Species
Source: http://www.stopans.org/Science_of_felt.php

In September 2008, Trout Unlimited called for the elimination of felt soles on wading boots by 2011. Just a week later, Simms Fishing Products introduced a new line of felt-free boots and announced that, beginning in 2010, they would no longer sell felt soles. These actions came from increasing concerns that felt soles were providing a perfect home for transporting invasive species. In fact, New Zealand had already announced that they were banning the use of felt soled boots beginning October 1, 2008. Since that time additional felt bans enacted (SE Alaska beginning January 1, 2011) and most wader companies have added felt-free alternatives to their product line.

The response from the fishing community to these actions has been mixed. Many anglers are embracing the new boots and believe if protecting our waters means giving up felt they are fine with the trade. Others are not so accepting, citing cost and the belief that the new waders don’t work as well in certain water types as reasons they oppose the switch. Recently, the science that underlies the movement to eliminate felt has been questioned. There are some who believe; anglers are being coerced into buying new boots based on no or flawed science, that there is no proof that anglers are moving invasives and that there is no proof that felt is worse than any other part of a boot.

In fact, there is sound scientific evidence that anglers are moving invasives and that felt is much worse than any other part of a boot or any other fishing equipment.

To understand how we got to a point where the perceived science is so different from the actual we need to back up and look at what put the focus on felt in the first place. The single biggest factor was the rapid spread of didymo in New Zealand. Didymo, Didymosphenia geminata is a single celled algae that is causing significant impacts to pristine trout waters worldwide. Native to the Northern Latitudes, didymo was not historically a significant problem. However, following its introduction to New Zealand in the early 2000’s it quickly became a significant ecological and economic problem.

In 2006, The Federation of Fly Fishers hosted an international didymo conference where experts discussed what was known and unknown about this invader. There was considerable discussion about how didymo was being spread and the conclusion was that didymo cells were being transported by anglers. Based on the best science available at the time, researchers speculated that other parts of wading boots might actually be of more concern than felt soles. Conference attendees knew that as they were meeting additional research was being conducted that would provide more answers about transmission on boots.

A didymo white paper was published based on the conference presentations. This paperhttp://stopans.org/Presentations/ScientificKnowledgeofDidymo.pdf is the best summary of didymo information available but only contains information gathered prior to 2006 and does not contain newer research results. The claims we hear today that there is no science to justify a felt ban result from the information reported at the 2006 conference and not the results of research conducted since then. So, what have we learned since 2006?

Do Anglers Move Didymo

Unless the actual first introduction of a new invasive species is observes it is difficult if not impossible to determine how it was first introduced. As Didymo has spread around the world we know when new discoveries are made but lack direct proof of how it got there. Scientists are studying this problem and two recently published studies give us a better grasp of how anglers are likely spreading invasives.

In 2007 at Montana State University, graduate student Kiza Gates published the results of her study of the potential for angler movement of whirling disease (WD)http://etd.lib.montana.edu/etd/2007/gates/GatesK0507.pdf. In the course of her research she studied anglers’ waders to determine the probability of their transporting WD and discovered that the average angler who does not clean their boots is transporting 16.78 grams (.59oz) of sediment from one access site to another. The amount of sediment was the same for people arriving at a site and leaving a site which means that anglers are moving sediment between waters. Doing some very basic calculations, she determined that in 2005 angler boots moved more than 6,300 pounds of sediment between access sites in Southwestern Montana. Additionally, she calculated that non-resident anglers carried more than 1,600 pounds of sediment into and out of Montana.

The next question she looked at was if WD was being carried between sites in this sediment. Unfortunately, the level of technology available did not allow her to answer the question for WD. However, a New Zealand mud snail was discovered in the sediment recovered from one boot which shows that invasive species are definitely being transported in the sediment carried on waders.

Thus, we know that anglers can transport didymo in this fashion. But, is it being transported this way? Canadian researcher Max Bothwell and his collaborators have examined the spread of didymo on Vancouver Island to try and determine how the species is spread. Although they do not have actual observations of anglers causing new introductions, they concluded that“the pattern of didymo spread among rivers on Vancouver Island correlates with the activity of fishermen and the commercial introduction and widespread use of felt-soled waders in the late 1980s”

They present the complete results of their work in a scholarly article published in Fisherieshttp://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/studies/didymo-blooms.pdf. In the course of their research they noted a significant relationship between the presence of didymo and the presence of anglers. They particularly note rivers in which didymo is not found upstream of angler access points and rivers that are closed to fishing that are surrounded by didymo but remain free of it. They reference a number of other well documented examples from around the world that illustrate the connection between wading anglers and the spread of didymo.

Why Focus on Felt?

With overwhelming evidence that fishing boots are spreading invasives the attention has turned to how to minimize the risk that anglers are transporting didymo. Research has shown that there are some practical options for killing didymo on fishing equipmenthttp://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/didymo/didymo-decon-feb-05-rev-aug-06.pdf. Heat, cold, drying and exposure to chemicals are all effective at killing the algae so the issue becomes, how does an average angler achieve the lethal levels for any of these methods?

When researchers looked at this question it became obvious that felt presented disinfection problems that other materials did not. The main reason for this is the nature of the felt material. Felt is constructed as a dense mat of randomly woven fibers. It has large interstitial spaces that can be a perfect trap for any small material. Gates, in the study referenced above, did extensive work to determine the relative ability of various wader materials to trap WD spores. In her experiments, felt trapped 100% of the WD spores that it was exposed to while rubber trapped none. This is dramatic evidence that felt soles present a much greater risk of transport than rubber soles.

However, as already noted, there are effective methods for killing didymo and it is logical to assume that felt can be disinfected using these techniques. Unfortunately, research from New Zealand shows that disinfecting felt soles is much more difficult than might be expected. Quite simply, the nature of the felt material is such that live didymo cells could easily penetrate the interior layers of the felt soles but treatment methods for killing didymo are ineffective at disinfecting these inner layers. Thus, even after following recommended decontamination procedures, it was likely that felt soled boots were still spreading didymo.

In their paper titled Studies on the survivability of the invasive diatom Didymosphenia geminata under a range of environmental and chemical conditions,http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/pests/didymo/didymo-survival-dec-06-rev-may-07.pdfthe researchers fully document their results. In their experiments felt soled boots that were examined 5 hours after use in infested waters contained nearly 3,000 times more live didymo cells than rubber soles (11,000 on felt vs. 3.9 on rubber). At 36 hours, a second careful cleaning yielded significant numbers of live cells from the felt soles and no live or dead cells from the rubber soles (290 on felt vs. 0 on rubber). We should note here that both leather shoe uppers and neoprene materials also held live cells at 36 hours but at much lower levels than the felt.

Careful experiments were then conducted to judge the efficacy of the various treatments for killing all of the live cells that might be trapped on waders. The results showed that most of the recommended treatments were effective at killing all of the cells found on most parts of the boot but that felt soles were an exception and it was difficult to achieve a complete kill of didymo trapped in felt soles. Specifically, the authors concluded:
• Felt soles present a greater risk of transfer than the other materials tested.
• Soaking in a disinfectant solution is far more effective than spraying (spraying was deemed to be totally ineffective)
• Even after 20 minutes of soaking, the disinfectant does not fully penetrate all areas of the felt sole
• Complete drying of felt soles is very difficult – soles can remain damp for weeks
• Heating the boots to 45°C (113°F) for at least 20 minutes will disinfect the soles

Based on the results of this research New Zealand determined that felt represents a unique threat that could only be adequately addressed through a complete ban. That ban is now in place and all New Zealand anglers are now felt free. With an Alaskan felt ban already approved and other US felt bans being considered we can expect that the move to eliminate felt will grow quickly.

What Does This Mean for Anglers

There is well documented scientific proof that felt represents a special problem in wading boots. Although many boot parts are capable of trapping and carrying aquatic invasive species (AIS), the difficulties of disinfecting felt make it very different from the rest of the boot parts. While the elimination of any boot part that could trap or transport AIS is beneficial and should be encouraged, the move to eliminate felt is a prudent and appropriate response to the threat it poses.

We need to recognize that much of the motivation for eliminating felt is focused on didymo. An argument can be made that felt only matters when the invasive species is microscopic and that any larger invader will be on the surface of the felt where it can be removed or killed. In fact, this is true. If the organisms are on the surface of the felt they can be eliminated. However, didymo is only one of our microscopic invaders. It has already been demonstrated that felt can easily trap and transport whirling disease spores and we must be realistic and recognize that there are likely new microscopic invaders still to come. Thus, it is only prudent that we move away from felt.

The debate over the effectiveness of rubber soles verses felt will continue to rage and there is no doubt that some anglers will insist that their recreational desires should take precedence over the resource issue. However, the move to eliminate felt is based on conclusive scientific proof that it represents a special threat. Companies, organizations and agencies are all accepting of this and the move away from felt will continue to grow. Anglers may not like the change and some will be vocal in their opposition. However, we should all make sure that any argument is based on sound science. The science shows that felt is a special problem and anyone disputing that has nothing to back their claims.

Finally, we must realize that felt is only one part of the problem. As already mentioned, there are many other places where invasives can be trapped and transported in our boots and other gear. We must adopt new habits that include careful cleaning after each use. While switching to felt-free waders is a good thing, it is just one step in the process of becoming a clean angler. Any one of us could be the person to carry an invader to a new water and none of us wants to be that person. Inspect, Clean and Dry your gear after each use and you will help to protect the resource that we all depend upon.

Unfortunately, increasing numbers of anglers are hearing the argument of no science and angler manipulation and some are passing it on as truth to others. This provides an excuse to anyone who wants to avoid switching to felt-free boots and erodes public confidence in fishery managers and science

Sea to Sky Invasive Species Council - Latest Blog Entries

SSISC Open House & AGM

SSISC Open House & AGM Wednesday April 24th, 1 - 4 pm Executive Suites Hotel, Squamish (40900 Tantalus Rd.)

ISCMV Spring Forum 2013 April 11

ISCMV Spring Forum 2013 April 11

Japanese knotweed in context (for fun)

DFO Consultation Period on the Intent to Regulate Aquatic Invasive Species

Protecting BC waters from aquatic invasive species

Whistler amends pesticide regulations around invasive species control

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS

Banishing blackberries - Squamish residents pull together to tackle invasive plant species

CORRECTION: Asian carp NOT found in Lytton and Lillooet areas

Pemberton community weed pull July 13th

2012 Invasive-free certified companies

Invasive snakehead fish found in Burnaby

Welcome to summer student Mitchel

Rose Park weed pull Squamish

SSISC Invasive-free certification program

Young Canada works summer hire

AGM and Forum Announcement

Pilot rebate program for invasive plant control on private land

2011 Summary

Japanese knotweed and residential property

RICS information papers

1. Scope

2. Introduction

3. The scale of the problem

4. Effective treatment of Japanese Knotweed

5. An assessment framework for Japanese Knotweed

6. Conclusion

Appendix A: Further sources of information

Appendix B: Glossary

The Science of Felt

A look at the science driving the move to eliminate the use of felt soled waders Bob Wiltshire Center for Aquatic Nuisance Species Source: http://www.stopans.org/Science_of_felt.php

SSISC Open House & AGM
Wednesday April 24th, 1 - 4 pm
Executive Suites Hotel, Squamish (40900 Tantalus Rd.)

A look at the science driving the move to eliminate the use of felt soled waders

Bob Wiltshire
Center for Aquatic Nuisance Species
Source: http://www.stopans.org/Science_of_felt.php