Camden’s Select Board will open a discussion July 2 at its regular scheduled meeting about initiating an amendment to the town ordinance that would regulate herbicide and pesticide use.

The illegal herbicide applications to Camden Harbor waterfront property in 2021 that poisoned trees and leached toxins onto the publicly owned Laite Beach has helped to elevate the conversation about regulating chemicals at the municipal level.

But it is a process that first requires research and public education, those involved emphasize. And any proposed ordinance amendments would first require the approval of Maine’s Bureau of Pesticide Control, the state agency that oversees herbicide and pesticide use and abuse.

A small group of Camden residents began meeting a few years ago to educate themselves about pesticides and herbicides, how those chemicals are regulated in Maine, and their possible effects on humans and pets.

“It is a small group of concerned citizens that got together,” said Jo-Ann Wilson, of Camden, adding that the inception of their meetings predated the, “Bond incident.”

The Bond incident is the 2021 herbicide application that resulted tree and vegetation poisoning on Metcalf Road property. It was followed by a $210,000 consent agreement between private landowners Arthur III and Amelia Bond, of St. Louis, Missouri, and the Town of Camden, and a $1.58 million private settlement between the Bonds and their neighbor, Lisa Gorman, whose property had been affected.

Gorman’s property fronts the harbor and is adjacent to Camden’s popular Laite Beach, frequented year-round by locals and visitors. Laite Beach fronts Camden Harbor, which is part of Penobscot Bay and the Atlantic Ocean.

Samples taken last winter from test bores at the publicly-owned Laite Beach on Camden Harbor tested positive for Alligare, the herbicide used illegally on nearby property. 

On March 6, the Camden Select Board voted to elevate their concerns to the office of Maine’s Attorney General and the Maine Legislature. 

“It’s [Alligare] in our park,” said Board Chair Tom Hedstrom, at a March 6 Select Board meeting. “It’s on our beach, where our citizens, our children, our pets go.”

He said at that March meeting: “I would make a public call right now to our Attorney General and our District Attorney to seriously consider criminal charges against the Bonds for this application of poison into our property, our resident’s property, our harbor, and endangering all of us.”

In April, Maine’s Office of Attorney General responded to a March 13 appeal from Camden Town Manager Audra Caler for support in pursuing additional enforcement.

Scott Boak, Assistant Attorney General listed the facts to date, which included the private settlement between the Bonds and Gorman, the consent agreement between the Bonds and Town of Camden, and the consent agreement between the Bonds and Maine’s Bureau of Pesticide Control, of $4,500.

Boak said his office would, “consider all of this information and the underlying situation carefully, in consultation with the BPC, DEP, and other interested state agencies, as we consider your request related to further enforcement.”

The AG’s office does comment on open investigations, nor does it confirm if it is even investigating a case.

For Camden’s informal group of citizens researching herbicides and pesticides, the Bond incident produced a silver lining, as Jo-Ann Wilson wrote in a recent letter to the editor.

“The silver lining to this story may be to recognize and bring an awareness of how we all may be slowly poisoning our own health, our loved ones and the natural world by innocently using such toxic agents.”

The discussion at the July 2 board meeting will touch on various aspects of the group’s research. They have so far learned that 33 municipalities in Maine restrict or ban pesticides within town lines.

In 2008, Camden instituted a policy that instructs the town to “refrain from the use of pesticides upon property it owns, uses or controls, except in situations that pose an imminent threat of serious injury to persons, property or agriculture.”

The policy said: “All pesticides are toxic to some degree and the widespread use of pesticides is both a major environmental problem and a public health issue. Federal regulation of pesticides is no guarantee of safety. Camden recognizes that the use of pesticides may have profound effects upon indigenous plants, surface water and ground water, as well as unintended effects upon people, birds and other animals in the vicinity of treated areas. Camden recognizes that all citizens, particularly children, have a right to protection from exposure to hazardous chemicals and pesticides.”

In 2008, the Citizens for a Green Camden were the catalyst for that effort, with Marsha Smith at the helm.

She has passed the torch to the more recent group that has been meeting, and both she and Beedy Parker, another longtime steward of Camden’s environmental health, have said it is time to control what is being applied on private property.

“Not only are the chemicals currently being used a hazard to our environment but more directly to our children and pets and future generations,” Smith wrote. “Chemical runoffs are poisoning the lakes, rivers, harbor and the bay. Many of these are forever chemicals. Recent situations in town amplify the urgent need to protect our environment.”

The current group of citizens recognize the need to disseminate information.

A grassroots effort in Ogunquit spent two years with volunteers educating the public, going door-to-door with information before the voters passed an herbicide/pesticide amendment to their municipal ordinance.

“The slower you go, the faster you get there,” said Wilson.

She hopes the Town of Camden will establish an ad hoc committee to produce recommendations and support educational efforts.

The group dreams even that some day towns along the west side of Penobscot Bay might band together and share similar policies regarding the use of toxic chemicals in the environment.

Reach Editorial Director Lynda Clancy at lyndaclancy@penbaypilot.com; 207-706-6657