The Impacts of Marijuana Activity on Fish (AFRP/Short Title) or

Assessing the Effect of Marijuana Activity on the Biotic Integrity of Streams in Northern California

A Quick! Review of Anadromous Fish, Marijuana Growing, and the Watersheds At Risk

THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF MARIJUANA

CULTIVATION

BACKGROUND: Chinook salmon populations have been severely reduced in the

Sacramento-San Joaquin system during historical times. In addition, even though

there is no estimate of what historic steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) populations

might have been, the Central Valley Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU) has been

determined to be at risk of extinction.

The Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) ESU is

currently faced with three primary limiting factors and threats:

(1) loss of most historic spawning habitat;

(2) degradation of the remaining habitat; and

(3) genetic threats from the Feather River Fish Hatchery (FRFH) spring-run Chinook

salmon program (NMFS 2009).

Locally, Tehama County is particularly known for illegal marijuana

cultivation. In August 2010, law enforcement officials on the

Lassen National Forest found 27 growing sites. These sites

(harvested and burned by law enforcement) contained an

estimated 98,000 plants, with a street value of nearly half a billion

dollars.

BUT FIRST, SOME BACKGROUND ON MARIJUANA

TERMS

“Cannabis”: Cannabis sativa, the scientific name of the plant.

“Marijuana”: cannabis grown for its THC content.

“Hemp”: cannabis with low levels of THC.

THC: tetra-hydro-cannabinol , the pharmacologically active ingredient in marijuana is

“Grow” (noun): an agricultural operation producing marijuana.

“215 Grow” – claims to be producing medical marijuana, usually on private land.

“Cartel Grow” - refers to suspected connection to an illegal drug trafficking organization.

“Trespass Grow” – without landowner permission, often on public land.

TYPES OF CULTIVATORS

Trespass Growers • Drug Trafficking Organizations

(DTO)—cartel

• Proposition 215 -215 growers exceeding local

ordinances for profit

-DTO growing for profit under 215 guise

PRIVATE LANDS: A NEW FRONTIER FOR

MARIJUANA GROWERS

California’s private property fences and

property lines violated daily

Trespassing marijuana growers are setting

booby traps, resorting to violence and

vandalism

And, spoiling the land by stealing water and

spraying dangerous chemicals that leach

into streams and harm wildlife

IMPACTS: TWO CATEGORIES

1. Development 2. Operational

REFUSE

Spring

Tributary to Marshall

Crossing Ck, trib to

Mill Ck, thence Trinity

River

NUTRIENTS / AMMONIA

LEADING TO EUTROPHICATION/TOXICITY

Fertilizers

Yellow Legged Frog at Red Mountain Grow

POLLUTION

Up to one pound of fertilizer is used for six marijuana plants throughout the season

Growing 12,000 plants equates to approximately 2,000 lbs. of fertilizer applied

Pesticides are used in large quantities

Bioaccumulation: Rodent killers keep on killing

Plant hormones seep into streams/groundwater

Human waste/garbage is typically not remediated

FERTILIZERS

DEFORESTATION

Hoopa, September 2010

GRADING AND ROAD CONSTRUCTION

TYPES OF PESTICIDES

Insecticides Organochlorine

(Lindane, Chlordane, Toxaphene)

Organophosphate (malathion, diazinon, dursban)

Carbamate (carbofuran, aldicarb, carbaryl)

Pyrethroid (Permethrin)

TYPES OF PESTICIDES

Rodenticides Zinc Phosphide

(rat/mouse bait)

Strychnine (gopher bait)

AntiCoagulants

Herbicides Glyphosate

(Roundup®)

2,4-D (Weed B Gon®)

NO BMP’S OR STREAM PROTECTION

NO BMP’S OR STREAM PROTECTION

WATER USE/STREAM DIVERSIONS

MARIJUANA PLANT WATER DEMAND

≈ 150 day watering period

Up to 5 gallons to 15 gallons per plant per day

Streams cannot support fish and provide large amounts of water to growers during low flows

DEWATERING STREAMS

August 2010

L A N D C O N V E R S I O N

July 2011

POST MOUNTAIN 2005

POST MOUNTAIN 2012

AFRP AREA OF COVERAGE

Photo by Doug Killam

Photo by Thomas Dunklin

Central Valley Chinook

and Steelhead

SPRING-RUN CHINOOK HISTORIC AND CURRENT

DISTRIBUTION, NORTHERN SACRAMENTO VALLEY

Excerpt, NMFS 2014 Draft Recovery Plan

human activity

source

additional step in causal pathway

proximate stressor

response

modifying factor

LEGEND

mode of action

Simple conceptual diagram for TOXIC CHEMICALS

Developed 7/2007 by Kate Schofield, Suzanne Marcy & Glenn Suter; modified 6/2010

mining & resource

extraction

↑ bioavailability, uptake, or toxicity

Road-related

channel alteration

agriculture Mariuana production

environmental conditions

↑ delivery of toxics to streams

watershed & riparian

devegetation

↓ condition

↑ toxic chemicals

↑ episodic exposures ↑ sustained exposures

↑ mortality

∆ ecosystem processes ∆ population & community structure

↓ reproductive success

∆ behavior ↑ susceptibility to

other stressors ↓ growth

↑ toxics in soil

↑ toxics in subsurface

waters

↑ toxics in surface runoff

↑ toxics in wet or dry deposition

↑ toxics in discharged

waters

THE AFRP-FUNDED STUDY Current legal marijuana cultivation is relatively unregulated with regards to the effect on natural resources,

although efforts by certain state agencies and county governments have been initiated (e.g. North Coast

Agricultural Lands Discharge Program).

Illegal/Cartel growing is a chronic, if not increasing , problem. If deemed significant, this perturbation could

suppress wild fish populations for an indeterminate period and further hamper recovery of listed species

and/or populations.

There is a need to assess this potential impact on anadromous fish populations, particularly special status

species, and identify the significance of its impact. This will allow resource agencies involved with species

recovery and restoration to more effectively address a prioritized set of impacts and focus the restoration

efforts accordingly.

Steps in the study:

Step 1. Develop the information and tools needed to define the potential stressors caused by marijuana

production using the EPA’s Causal Analysis or another comparable procedure to analyze all available data in

specific northern California stream systems. Ultimately, the study plan including this non-biased analysis will

compare the threats of marijuana cultivation relative to historic and present land-use activities in the

watershed.

Step 2. Conduct monitoring activities within the selected watershed and at secured marijuana fields following

law enforcement activities.

Step 3. Finalize two sampling protocols; one for evaluating targeted reaches and watershed condition affected

by MCSs and one for determining impacts of marijuana cultivation on specific sites. The later protocol will

provide data for prosecuting individual cultivators committing environmental crimes.

Step 4. Produce a report to communicate the effects of marijuana cultivation on biotic integrity and

anadromous fish; identify and prioritize areas to protect and/or restore; and develop a process and/or data

that can be used to quantify those effects.

MF Cottonwood Creek

Study Site

Antelope Creek Study Site(s)

CONTACT INFORMATION

NORTHERN AREA AFRP

Tricia Parker Hamelberg, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, (530) 527-3043, tricia_parker@fws.gov

Brenda Olson, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, (530) 527-3043, brenda_olson@fws.gov or Tricia Bratcher, CA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, (530) 225-3845, Patricia.Bratcher@wildlife.ca.gov Mike Healey (Butte Cr), CA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, (916) 358-4334, Mike.Healey@wildlife.ca.gov Also visit the AFRP website at: http://www.fws.gov/stockton/afrp/ Photos courtesy of OSPR, D. Bickford and P. Bratcher

WHO CAN YOU REPORT TO?

Determine Jurisdiction County Sheriff, CDFW, DOJ, Federal Agency

Roles and Responsibilities Sheriff: Usually the lead agency on private land CDFW: Lead agency for state and CDFW land

Supports allied agencies Lead agency for environmental issues WET TEAM!

DOJ: Usually handles cases where county boundaries are crossed

Federal Agencies: US Forest Service, BLM and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)

AGENCY CONTACTS Shasta County Sheriff’s Office- Sgt Barry Powell

phone (530) 351-5240

email: bpowell@co.shasta.ca.us

Tehama County Sheriff’s Office- Detective Chris Benson

Phone: (530) 529-7920

email: cbenson@tehamaso.org

CA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife- Lt. DeWayne Little , WET Team

phone: (530) 604-9789

email: dewayne.little@wildlife.ca.gov

U.S. Forest Service- Captain Chad Krogstad

phone: (530) 226-2591

email: ckrogstad@fs.fed.us

U.S. Bureau of Land Management- Supervising Ranger Kenyon Riley

phone: 530-224-2100

email: kriley@blm.gov