The synopsis: around 3.1 million pounds / year. But there are lots of details here...
We sometimes drown in data, and this Challenge turns out to
be a hard problem not because there’s too little data, but because there’s too
MUCH data and because so much of it is so similar!
The Challenge asks “Just how many pounds of herbicide are
sprayed along California roads each year?”
I limited the definition of “California roads” to just “state roads”
largely because which organization maintains the roadsides varies tremendously
depending on ownership. Country roads
are run (and sprayed) by the various counties; city roads likewise; but STATE
roads are owned and maintained by the California Department of Transportation
(aka CalTrans).
I spent a good deal of my times trying to figure out what
would be an authoritative source to answer this question. I began with
the query:
[caltrans roadside OR "road side" herbicide]
I used “Caltrans” because I knew that would be the preferred
name of the “California Department of Transportation.” I quickly learned that the official Caltrans
web site is dot.ca.gov, but that the term Caltrans is used almost everywhere as
a shorthand for the longer name.
This query worked pretty well, but got a lot of anti-herbicide
advocacy groups (e.g., civilliberties.org, sdearthtimes.org, and
pesticide.org). The reality is probably
somewhere hidden in all of their writings, so this challenge mostly boils down
to figuring out what the consensus of opinion is about roads, spraying, pounds
of herbicide and kinds of chemicals. So
in a sense, this is a great problem to learn how to read highly charged content
from multiple points of view.
I decided to work from the Caltrans point-of-view first,
hoping that they’d have fairly straightforward data about roads, herbicides,
and patterns of spraying.
It didn’t take me long to get to the 5th result, "Use of herbicides in roadside environments," which led me into the maze of state reports and sometimes confusing masses
data.
I spent around 2 hours looking at different Caltrans
documents, trying to get to what looked like a decent data set about roadside
spraying.
I learned a few things along the way… mostly about how the
state of California is organized, but more importantly (for our purposes) what
special language they use to encode their information.
Adding
to the confusion, different herbicides often have a large variety of
names. There are product names (Roundup;
Eraser... vs. chemical names (e.g.,
glyphosate, Diammonium salt; glyphosate, dimethylamine salt; 2,4 D … )
One of the real treasures I found was that the California
state website, CA.gov, has a department of “Pesticide Regulation” They have a database system “CalPIP” http://calpip.cdpr.ca.gov/main.cfm
that provides the ability to drill down (e.g., by county, pesticide name,
chemical name, or zip code).
I also learned that the term-of-art used to describe
roadside application is “rights-of-way.”
So when searching through data, that’s the common term used across all
of California data.
But what I wanted was a data sheet with pounds-applied. Now, after 2 hours, I’d found several decent
looking data sets.
One
of my good queries was for:
[
herbicide California right-of-way ] -- note that right-of-way also matches "right of way"
which led me to the
PesticideInfo.org site (http://www.pesticideinfo.org/DS.jsp?sk=40 ) which
aggregates data from Caltrans over the past several years. You can see the “right of way” (note the variation in the term!!!) data for1991 – 2009 here.
From
this data, I was able to make the following chart of active-component herbicide use on
rights-of-way:
This data looked about right, but they’re an advocacy group lobbying to restrict the overuse of pesticides. So I wanted to check their data. I did that by using the CalPIP site I mentioned above.
From CalPIP I got a data table of ALL reported pesticide use
in the state by Caltrans for 2010 (the latest data I could find) and imported
it into my spreadsheet app.
I filtered by herbicide (excluding all of the other –cides),
then filtered by “rights of way” uses (that is, roadside application only) then
added up all 49,190 reported instances of herbicide uses on the sides of the
road. Answer? 3.1 million pounds. Bear in mind that this is “active chemical”
only—they guys on the trucks also mixed in other stuff (called “adjuvants”)
such as diesel oil or other sticky / anti-spray-drift compounds. They actually sprayed 8.3 million pounds on the roadside.
In
any case, here’s the top of that spreadsheet:
and
the relevant summation:
(The little green triangles in the upper left of each summary number are complaining that some of the cells have "N/A" in them. This doesn't really affect the total numbers.)
The good news here is that this number fits in very
plausibly with the rest of the data from the chart above, so I’d think of this
as confirming the data from PesticideInfo.org (which, to their credit, links to
the Caltrans website as their original data source, so I’m not terribly
surprised).
Search
lesson: There
are many to point out here. This was a
big, complex task. So let me list my
take-aways.
1. Big tasks require taking notes. I had a Google Doc open in a separate window
on a second monitor. I don’t know how I would have kept track of
everything I was doing (and all of the various reports I read) without some
systematic notes. However…
2. You can re-find data if you copy enough of
the original into your notes.
When I was creating the chart above I at one point couldn’t remember
where I’d found that data. Luckily, I
was able to put in a bunch of the data (suitably double-quoted) and was able to
re-discover where I’d gotten it from.
3. Be aware of “terms of art” in your reading. The example of “rights of way” was
important. I’d tried many searches with
variations on “roadside spraying” or “highway herbicide”—but they were all too
general. Once I noticed “rights of way”
as a specialist’s term, I was able to really focus in on what I wanted to
find.
4. Look for multiple resources all pointing to
the same place. The first few documents I read all pointed back to the dot.ca.gov
site, and once I started reading around, I kept seeing a few resources that
were being referred to a great deal.
That was a handy insight to have.
5. There is diversity even in the government. One tends to think of government sites as
monolithic and all hewing to the “government’s story.” But I was surprised by how much variation
there was between different government web pages, even those that are telling more-or-less
the same story. Some documents discuss
how non-toxic the herbicides are, others tell a different story. Again, the truth is out there, you just have
to collect the data and evaluate it for yourself.
-----
Postscript
I started out this whole process by wondering just how many
miles of state roads CalTrans operates.
The obvious query:
[ caltrans miles of roads ]
First result: http://www.dot.ca.gov/aboutcaltrans.htm leads to >50K miles of roads.
But the second result:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/interstate/ says that the entire Interstate
Highway System is 46.5K miles! Does the
state of California have more miles of roads than the entire US Interstate
System?
Looking at a few other sites, I found a few references
claiming that California has only ~15K miles of roads.
What’s going on here?
After looking through a few more pages, I landed on the
CalTrans document listing total road miles and LANE miles.
There, Table 1 points out that CalTrans has 50.46K miles of LANES and 15.1K
miles of ROADS. Ah ha! (That same table points out that the Golden
Gate Bridge Authority has 15.8 miles of lanes but only 3.38 miles of
roads. Since I’ve driven all those
roads, I know they’re all 4 lanes wide (at least), so now we see where the two
numbers come from: LANES vs.
ROADS.)
6. Be sure you
understand the basis on which your claims are based. Although the difference between 50.46K and
15.1K seems huge, the truth is that it’s really the same number… just with
different basis at work.
Dr. Russell. Great answer!
ReplyDelete"terms of art" are many times hard to find. I thougt as RoseMary that Right of Way encompassed much more than just roadsides until found that was the right name. I like to take notes also because if when posting my answer doesn´t show I can post it again.
Finally, about how toxic is this herbicid? Found that worker can sue over herbicides. Also found that in California a year later some sprayed roads are without vegetation and even so, they want to spray again.
And, today I just read an article that I like to share because it relates with toxicity. It is about pesticides and bees in EU: "Bee deaths: EU delays action on pesticides ban" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21793365
Have a great week.
Dr. Rick Relyea shows definitive research that the pesticides are killing amphibians.
ReplyDeleteHe also shows great courage in going up against the Darth Vader of companies.
http://www.pitt.edu/~relyea/Site/Roundup.html
I live in the Sierra Nevada foothills where the brown roadside stripes go for miles and miles along major thoroughfares including in, over, and through water. How did this happen? This is California and we are dumping thousands and thousands of pounds of herbicides onto our state every year now, sometimes multiple sprayings. Was a CEQA document prepared for this? It is no doubt a blast of poison putting the last nails in the coffin of our roadside amphibian populations. This has to stop.
I learned alot from this challenge. I had a preconceived idea about right of way because of my background and for me ROWs included so much more. Narrowing down to Caltrans should have been my clue. So terminology has to apply to the subject and itmay have a regional tone to it as well.
ReplyDeleteSecondly I am new to online databases and when I was not getting what I wanted I spent time trying to understand how to use this tool. Working from a tablet can be restrictive but I still could have gotten figures. I would appreciate advice on making the best use of the data. I saw another student got all the data (well done!) but it didn't zero in on the specific data we needed. Any tips on how these work generally, how to make our own tables and charts from them, and how to get just what we need would be very helpful. Links to online resources would be useful. I am hoping that once you have the basic concepts then it is just a matter of identifying info within a specific database.
Wanting to learn more I went through the exercise as you described and stumbling a bit along the way. First I realize I have to use my desktop when using a database so if others our trying on a tablet you too may have difficulties. I downloaded both databases as described. I then imported them into a spreadsheet. I was able to create a chart (something I haven't done in many years) which looks a lot like yours. Then I downloaded the 2010 database. I selected the right of way filter and I got the same pounds of chemical applied exactly, my products applied were close. Now I filtered Products Applied leaving out all products for rodents, insects, adjuvants and other "obvious" products that weren't herbicides. I did it then realized you had actually accepted the N/A in the "Chemicals Applied" column so I could stop at this point. Is that why you accepted that conclusion?
ReplyDeleteSorry if this is too elementary for others ( I hope few others have questions) but I'm going from not knowing anything about using databases or importing data into spreadsheets. I see there are database applications and I downloaded a free one. Is this in fact a useful tool, more so than importing it into a spreadsheet? I haven't experimented with it yet. The above has been a sufficient challenge. Thanks.