Round Up, UBC, Environmental Impacts, and UBC's Response.

I was walking by the field sponsored by Tourmaline Oil recently and one of the regular staff was spraying the margin under the fence with roundup. They said they couldn’t use an alternative (like acetic acid) since they didn’t have the time to do this every week.

I wonder why it is deemed necessary to have a browned out strip a foot wide under and along the fence margin in the first place, while also noting the evident problems with this ‘safe’ pesticide (see link to McGill research on roundup).

 

I would note that despite the athletics' fields being totally fabricated space (many now covered with plastic and other synthetics) having some margins that are biological does make small contributions to biodiversity and does remediate some of the ill effects caused by the fields. Having grassy margins can encourage increased biodiversity and improved ecological health.

 

For example, grass plants, dandelion, and thistles attract small birds (like sparrows and goldfinches) when they go to seed (which can’t happen if sprayed or cut).  Allowing margins to grow in ways that some (perhaps donors?) find unsightly is in fact beneficial to our overall wellbeing.

I am sure there is a ready answer that will explain to me that roundup is actually ok to use and that UBC has net positive ecological impacts.  I appreciate all that.  Yet. ... 

It still calls  out for a quiet moment of reflection and consideration to reconsider whether a  scorched earth look along the baseball field fences is worth the addition of more toxic chemicals into our local environment, however small these effects  might be.

I received the following response from Kavie Toor regarding the use of Round Up on fields at UBC in response to a version of the above note.

------

Dear Charles 

 

Thank you for your email,  

 

I was able to connect with my grounds team and am able to share the below response from them:

 

Within Thunderbird Park we currently have significant areas that we have limited active maintenance program, this allows and encourages the biodiversity to flourish and these areas are the home to a large variety of flora and fauna. We are also looking at ways we can enhance these areas and other areas within the park to encourage the growth of the biodiversity within the park. For example, we encourage the areas around all our grass fields to be as diverse as possible (i.e. have weeds in them) we do not treat or spray these areas, allowing these areas to flower to encourage pollinators.  The majority of the footprint of the park is still biological as you probably know grass is an excellent carbon sink, that is very effective at exchanging carbon. We also typically allow clippings to return to the ground to provide a natural fertilizer or to composting system for clippings. Part of the maintenance programs also involves returning materials to flower beds and other areas. 

 

We take the use of chemicals very seriously and do not use them without prior thought being given to adverse effects.  We strive to use the least amount of product possible and to use products that have been deemed safe to the environment and within the related guidelines. We currently use Roundup because it is an approved BC Ministry of the Environment product and becomes inert very shortly after contact with the soil.  We use best practices when spraying (i.e. spraying only when there is no rain and minimal wind to cause drift in the forecast). 

 

As a point of clarification the link you provided was to a study on use of Roundup by farmers on crops. This is broadcast spraying that covers all plant material and not spot spray. As mentioned we are very selective on what and how we spray, we abide by the guidelines for safe and effective application and we limit use.

 

Within the park, there are very limited areas that spray is used. The areas include: bark mulch areas under bleachers and besides the South Turf field, gravel areas around buildings, the retaining wall between the baseball diamond and the edges of all synthetic fields (were the turf meets any of the concrete border) to prevent damage to the fields. We try to limit use of herbicides to spot spraying of the weeds that develop in these areas, we do not spray wide areas just to kill grass.   

 

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our herbicide program 

 

Kavie

My admittedly snarky reply;

Dear Kavie,

 

You did exactly what I though you would – tell me not to worry, it’s fine, etc, etc and gently point to some possible errors or misconceptions in my observations.

 

I suggest sit back, relax and reflect on whether this is really the right thing to do [use round up], even if you can be comfortable in your answer and point to bc approval (which merely allows one to say its okay without considering wider implications).

 

Also, pointing to the fact that the one link I provided was to [use on] a farm doesn’t really exonerate your use, it’s a simplistic deflection by saying the article doesn’t pertain. Obviously, that link wasn’t directly relevant [to athletic fields], it was merely an example of some of the issues and with critical laterally thinking could have been used to consider potential adverse impacts in this industrial educational plant.

 

Let me apologize for not being super clear in my original email. I know that many in the field of landscape arts consider roundup to be minimally destructive and, if used sparingly, to have minimal adverse health effects.  My point was to ask that you and your team take a momentary break, consider some alternative perspectives, not to get defensive and fragile, and consider (since you have acknowledged you are all concerned and seriously great on this topic) how you can be even better.

 

With regards,

 

Charles

Analyzing the UNA Election Results

The results are in and the 'current' director slate practically swept the election with three of their four candidates topping the polls and their fourth candidate (Kang) ranking 6th overall.  The seventh candidate elected, Mojdehi, scraped in from 9th place (in a field of 13). He won due to the local area rule that say no more than three candidates can be elected from one local area. This is two elections in a row (2019 & 2021) in which a lower vote candidate was elected due to the bylaw.

In terms of voter turnout this election was surprisingly disappointing with only 1209 people casting ballots. The record remains the 2014 election that saw almost 1500 people cast ballots. It is also disappointing that close to 2000 votes were 'wasted.'  If each voter had cast the full 7 votes they could there would have been about 8500 votes cast. What happened was that most people only voted for 4, 5, or 6 candidates and a total of 6,537 votes were cast on 1200 ballots.

[Update, Dec. 2/21]. It also came to light that 134 ballots mailed to the old V6T 1Z4 postal code (faculty and staff housing) were returned. UBC and Canada Post changed the postal code some years ago, but mail continued to get delivered. This time it didn't work and a number of ballots found themselves back at UNA headquarters. It is uncertain whether the missed voters did get their ballots or not. Based on an overall voter turn out of 20% a potential 25 ballots may have been disrupted by this problem.

Mojdehi, elected with 360 votes, ran once before (2016).  In that election he placed last in a field of four candidates while wining a respectable support of 1/3 of the voters.  This is his first time elected.  Five Wesbrook Place candidates received more votes than Mojdehi in places 4 through 8. Given his role in UBC Security he should please those voters calling for more law and order.

Holmes handily beat off his Hamptom Place competitor Ngieng by a factor of about two to one. Ngieng was close to winning a seat.  Given the local area rule she would  only have needed about 40 more votes to have joined Holmes on the board and then beat Mojdehi to a seat. As the highest scoring student candidate it was in the realm of possibility. But election stories are about what did happen, not what could have happened.

The notable thing in this election is the consistently poor showing of the youth candidates (the AMS Slate) who occupied the bottom four positions after Mojdehi. Ranging from Ngieng at 318 to Gan at 219 they were unable to break onto the board.  From neighbours and friends I've spoken to it seems the four youth candidates really didn't click with most UNA voters. They made big promises, sweeping claims, and didn't seem to be able to activate that great many student voices that AMS have claimed are unheard and unrepresented in the UNA. If there is an untapped reservoir of unheard students voters living within the UNA they didn't turn up for this election. With the effort of the AMS communications media behind them one might have thought the student slate would have faired a lot better, even electing one or two candidates. The AMS even voted to spend $7,400 to promote the student candidates (see also Ubyssey, last paragraph). But the numbers show us they had no purchase on the UNA voter and took the last four places in the vote totals. The way in which the UNA terms of office (three years) and scheduling of elections (once every three years) will make it hard for any student candidate to get elected - hard, but not impossible.

Now the hard work of governing what amounts to a community centre advisory council and municipal services contractor to UBC.  The elected span the diversities of the residential neighbourhoods - Vancouver retirees and newcomers to Canada, university faculty and staff, renters and leaseholders, and all manner of occupations and personal histories. They have all demonstrated a strong commitment to community values, even as they may each define these 'values' differently.  I wish them well and look forward to seeing how they find their way!

The breakdown of votes are as follows:

CANDIDATE	NEIGHBOURHOOD	TOTAL VOTES	SUCCEED?
Watson, Richard	Hawthorn Place	825	Yes
McCutcheon, Murray	Hawthorn Place	782	Yes
Holmes, Bill	Hampton Place	740	Yes
Glassheim, Eagle	Wesbrook Place	694	Yes
Kang, Zheng (Jane)	Wesbrook Place	605	Yes
Gallo, Maria	Wesbrook Place	542	Yes
Liu, Fei	Wesbrook Place	534	No*
Cheng, Tony	Wesbrook Place	384	No*
Mojdehi, Ali	Hawthorn Place	360	Yes
Ngieng, Sofia	Hampton Place	318	No
Prost, Mitchell	Hawthorn Place	314	No
Co, Erin	Wesbrook Place	220	No
Gan, Mary	Wesbrook Place	219	No

Colour Legend

Name:  'Current Directors' Slate

Name:  'AMS Slate.

UNA Election Results

Results: UNA Elections 2021

Members of the University Neighbourhoods Association (UNA) have elected seven members to its Board of Directors during the 2021 UNA Elections.

The successful candidates are:

1. Gallo, Maria – Wesbrook Place
2. Glassheim, Eagle – Wesbrook Place
3. Holmes, Bill – Hampton Place
4. Kang, Zheng (Jane) – Wesbrook Place
5. McCutcheon, Murray – Hawthorn Place
6. Mojdehi, Ali – Hawthorn Place
7. Watson, Richard – Hawthorn Place

The breakdown of votes are as follows:

CANDIDATE	NEIGHBOURHOOD	TOTAL VOTES	SUCCEED?
Watson, Richard	Hawthorn Place	825	Yes
McCutcheon, Murray	Hawthorn Place	782	Yes
Holmes, Bill	Hampton Place	740	Yes
Glassheim, Eagle	Wesbrook Place	694	Yes
Kang, Zheng (Jane)	Wesbrook Place	605	Yes
Gallo, Maria	Wesbrook Place	542	Yes
Liu, Fei	Wesbrook Place	534	No*
Cheng, Tony	Wesbrook Place	384	No*
Mojdehi, Ali	Hawthorn Place	360	Yes
Ngieng, Sofia	Hampton Place	318	No
Prost, Mitchell	Hawthorn Place	314	No
Co, Erin	Wesbrook Place	220	No
Gan, Mary	Wesbrook Place	219	No

* Candidate did not succeed due to Bylaw 5.14.

• Total Number of Votes Cast: 6,537
• Total No. of Ballots: 1,209

The Directors-elect will begin their term on December 14, 2021.

The UNA Elections ran from November 8 to November 30, 2021. The counting procedures took place at the Wesbrook Community Centre and were overseen by a neutral third-party elections officer assisted by volunteers from the community. The UNA would like to thank all volunteers who dedicated their time and effort to the counting process.

The UNA would also like to thank all the candidates who put their name forward and whose desire to serve the UNA community is commendable.

Results of the 2021 UNA Elections can also be found on the UNA website.