Archived decisions

Contact: Kevin Fuller, ext: 7958 e-mail: [email protected]

Jim Pettitt, tel: 01252 398200 e-mail: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 This report looks at the operation of the weed control arrangements on the highways in Rushmoor and makes recommendations on how the level of service may be improved .

2. Background

2.1 There has been criticism this year throughout the county but particularly in the urban parts of the county, and specifically within the Rushmoor Borough, about the control of weeds on the highway. Weeds have been prolific in some parts and there is concern that the treatment has been ineffective and applied too late.

2.2 Prior to the change in Agency arrangements, this activity was undertaken by the Highways team at Rushmoor Borough Council, who operated the highway agency for Hampshire County Council and the district Street Scene related work, including street cleansing. This integrated approach allowed co-ordination between cleansing and weed control applications using an individual contract for the Rushmoor area within the budget of £18,000 (two years ago), which provided for three treatments each growing season. The County standard application, with the exception of `enhanced' applications in both Rushmoor and Basingstoke, is for two treatments of chemical each year.

2.3 Weed treatment on the highway is now carried out by the Hampshire County Council Term Maintenance contractor. A review has been carried out to find out the causes of the problems this season and how things might be improved in future years.

2.4 It is important that we remind ourselves that the chemicals (Glyphosate) used to control the growth of weeds are `Non Residual' i.e. they require weed presence and leaf growth to ingest the chemical ingredient to make it active. The chemicals are effective in knocking back the plant growth, but control, rather than eradication of weeds is all that is possible. In addition, because of environmental concerns, all herbicides are restricted by government and this will shortly extend to the general public use within their own private gardens. Hampshire County Council had the foresight some five years ago to introduce a policy to restrict chemical usage for its own activities which is much in step with current thinking and developments.

2.5 New herbicides are coming onto the market and further investigation into alternative treatments needs to be undertaken in conjunction with specialist contractors.

2.6 As the environmental concern is mainly about the run off from highway into water courses, it is certain that there would be a need to implement detailed schedules of the use of any new herbicides.

2.7 The pattern of more temperate weather has extended the growing season and this influences the treatment times. The current practice of two applications of chemical treatment needs to be reviewed in the light of this change in climate condition.

2.8 There is no doubt however, that properly and timely applied `Non Residual' weed control chemicals should control weed presence to an acceptably low level. The timing of the chemical application therefore needs to be appropriate to the weed growth and sufficient flexibility should be provided in the spraying programmes.

2.9 Rushmoor is of the view that they can control the application of weed killer better, through smaller, locally controlled contracts than by the present county wide contract.

3. Weed Control Treatment during 2003

3.1 One factor in the weed control problems this year has been the treatment cycle put in place by the contractor. It is clear that in parts of the county, including Rushmoor, the first treatment cycle was too late, allowing weeds to become well established and flourish before receiving the first dose of chemicals. Discussions are being held with the contractor to improve the programming and application in future.

3.2 Rushmoor have offered to undertake the highway related weed control as part of their Street Management activities in a similar way to the arrangements prior to the Highway Agency changes. There may be financial savings over term contract rates by doing this, with also, an improved service. However, there would be a contractual and funding implication on the Term Maintenance Contract should this option be progressed, which would more than affect such savings. However, this would need to be tested through a negotiation process.

3.3 An additional improvement may be to strengthen the link between the Rushmoor Borough Street Scene activities and the weed killing programme. The co-ordination of weed control spraying and street cleansing could enable the sweeping away of dead weed growth after it has been sprayed and taken effect.

3.4 A second factor exacerbating weed growth has been the exceptionally warm seasons. Whilst there has been low rainfall which has reduced growth, the actual growing season has been extended by six/eight weeks more than usual. An additional treatment i.e. three per annum, would help to improve weed control in recognition of the climatic factors and the `Non Residual' nature of the chemicals used. The current budget for countywide weed control is £520,000 per annum. An additional treatment would cost a further £260,000 per annum Countywide. A targeted third treatment aimed at urban areas with particularly severe problems is estimated to cost £87,000 per annum Countywide. In Rushmoor, the additional funding for a targeted third treatment would be approximately £8,000. It is likely that the cost of a third treatment would be at the expense of the planned maintenance budgets and therefore, would need to be considered as part of the budget planning process.

4. Improving the Service

4.1 In view of the difficulties experienced, Hampshire County Council will be putting in place various changes to help improve the service. These include:

(i) closer liaison with the main contractor and sub-contractor to ensure that weed killing operations take place at the optimum time to be effective;

(ii) working more closely with the district council officers to arrange that road sweeping operations are coordinated with weed killing, to ensure that dead weeds are removed at the appropriate time;

(iii) discussions will also take place with the Environment Agency to investigate if there are alternative herbicides that would be more effective and still be environmentally acceptable; and

(iv) views are being invited on whether a third weed treatment should be a higher priority than the current pattern of spending in the road maintenance programme.

4.2 Rushmoor Borough Council has also requested that consideration be given to transfer the weed killing operation to Rushmoor to be part of the Street Scene Service to enable contract savings and more local control.

Recommendation

That the views of the Panel are taken into consideration by County Council officers in looking at further improvements to the weed killing service.

8332/KF/JP