Tribe unveils new pest management policy

By Nicole Montesano

Smoke Signals staff writer

Members of the Tribe’s interdisciplinary working group, which includes staff from several different Tribal departments, have been meeting since April 2025 to create a new integrated pest management policy applicable to all lands owned by the Tribe.

They unveiled their work Thursday, Feb. 5, during a meeting in the Tribal Community Center. The group is accepting comments on the proposed pest management policy.

These may be submitted by email to nrd@grandronde.org. Copies of the document may be requested from the executive office. The group includes members from the Tribal Executive Office, Facilities, Ceded Lands, Tribal Lands and Natural Resources. It hopes to have the policy approved by Tribal Council by the end of February, with implementation beginning Sunday, March 1.

Tribal Council members Kathleen George, Tonya Gleason-Shepek, Lisa Leno, Matthew Haller and Pete Wakeland attended the meeting, some virtually and some in person.  

Last year, the Tribe discontinued the use of glyphosate, a controversial herbicide also known by the brand name Roundup. It then discontinued the use of herbicides and pesticides altogether on the Tribal campus and housing grounds. The ban did not extend to other Tribally owned lands.

Tribal Interim General Manager Bryan Langley said at the meeting the Tribe would like to eventually eliminate all use of chemical herbicides and pesticides, but that it will take some time.

Tribal Natural Resources Department Restoration Ecologist and Fish & Wildlife Policy Analyst Lindsay McClary moderated the meeting. She told the audience that in her work restoring conservation lands, she often relies on herbicides to clear out large areas of aggressive and invasive plants before she can begin restoring native habitat. She said she chooses products that degrade quickly and are considered low risk and views their use as a tool for aiding restoration.

Several audience members expressed unhappiness with allowing any amount of usage. Some said they were also unhappy at not being included earlier in the process.

 The new policy divides the 17,075 acres of Tribal lands into different zones, where different levels of chemical intervention are allowed, referring to them as low risk, moderate risk and high risk/alternative strategy. It also requires that anyone applying herbicides or pesticides on Tribal lands have a pesticide applicators license from the state, a signed contract with the Tribe if they are not Tribal employees, keep careful and clear records and wear appropriate protective equipment.

The alternative strategy category covers some 1,374 acres, including all Tribal housing, tumwata village in Oregon City, Chachalu Tribal Museum & Cultural Center, Fort Yamhill and the Tribal campus.

It is the most restrictive in terms of allowed chemicals, according to Natural Resources Specialist Anna Ramthun.

“In general, we are proposing non-chemical options for pest control in housing and Tribal campus, so the low-risk options are not allowed,” she said in an email. “However, we anticipate that there may be a need for exemption for pests that can carry disease or cause structural damage to buildings. In those events, departments involved can seek exemptions, which are reviewed by the tech team, with the intention of the review being to identify alternate strategies if they exist and help identify lowest risk pesticides if they are deemed necessary.”

The largest category, moderate risk, encompasses 14,720 acres, including such areas at the reservation forestlands, Ellendale, Eel Rock, Cherry City, the Portland Office and the Tribal Police station.

The remaining category, low risk, has 981 acres, including Noble Oaks, Rattlesnake Butte, Chase and Chemawa Station.

The federal Environmental Protection Agency has approved 15,000 products for use in Oregon. The group evaluated 83 of them to come up with a list of what would be allowed in which areas and the policy includes a chart to walk users through what actions are allowed in which areas. It includes a list of 11 chemical products that are categorized as low risk, including things such as ant bait; 16 considered “moderate” risk and 37 that may be used only with the approval of the team, a category that includes glyphosate. All others are prohibited.

The team noted that there are further actions the Tribe may wish to consider, such as changing landscaping on the campus from grass lawns to native plantings and increasing or improving mechanical options, such as hand-pulling of weeds. Some audience members said they are interested in pursuing the idea of changing campus landscaping to more native plants.

George told the audience Tribal Council has approved four more landscaping positions to account for the increased workload of relying on strategies such as hand-weeding instead of spraying.

Some audience members questioned how the policy would affect dealing with issues such as nests of yellow jackets around campus or on the powwow grounds.

Ramthun said in an email that wasp control “would fall under an exemption for human health pests in high use areas. Wasp sprays generally cover a very small treatment area and help protect those with allergies. We also encourage use of traps, sealing of potential nesting areas in buildings and structures, and placing attractants (like recycling containers) further from high use areas to reduce the need for chemical treatment.”

McClary noted, however, that permission would be required for applying any sprays. “Spray for stinging insects are in the exempt category which means they would need pre-approval before application,” she said in an email. “Essentially, this is the current process where requests are sent to Bryan Langley. Our policy would offer a place for Bryan to send those requests.”

The document contains additional sections that expand on areas of the policy and are expected to be regularly updated. It defines pests as falling into four categories: Vegetation, fungus, insects and rodents. However, the group noted that pests are often context dependent.

“You may have a species that’s a pest in housing, that we wouldn’t blink an eye at in Natural Resources,” Ramthun said.