UVM tree-fruit specialist tells committee that limits on paraquat could threaten high-density orchards without careful transition

Dr. Terry Bradshaw, a tree-fruit and viticulture specialist associated with UVM extension, told the Agriculture, Food Resiliency & Forestry committee that high-density apple plantings have increased growers’ exposure to trunk damage and that weed control is essential to orchard profitability.

“I present with the official UVM disclaimer. This is strictly, not testimony for or against either of these bills,” Bradshaw said, then explained his background in cultivar evaluation and extension work before summarizing the current state of Vermont orchards. He said bearing acreage has fallen from about 3,000 acres in 1995 to roughly 1,300–1,500 acres today and estimated the overall apple sector—including cider—at about $30 million.

Bradshaw described how modern ‘‘tall spindle’’ or trellised systems boost trees per acre from a few hundred to more than 1,000 and raise establishment costs to tens of thousands of dollars per acre, changing breakeven timing depending on market and system. Under wholesale assumptions some high-density systems may take a decade or more to break even; under higher-value retail assumptions breakeven can occur in five to seven years.

The main concern Bradshaw raised was physical vulnerability: smaller-diameter trunks multiplied across many trees produce far more exposed trunk surface that can be girdled by voles or damaged by misapplied herbicide. He summarized research showing untreated weed pressure reduces trunk cross-sectional area, apples per tree and bushels per acre, and said, “we need to control weeds in these high density systems.”

Bradshaw reviewed the trade-offs among post-emergent herbicides: glyphosate (systemic, lower mammalian toxicity, shorter reentry interval), glufosinate (nonsystemic, longer reentry interval and some trial evidence of trunk cankers), and paraquat (contact herbicide, higher mammalian toxicity but quick environmental inactivation). He noted Cornell and Rutgers researchers discouraged glufosinate in some contexts after trial observations of trunk cankers, and that chlorpyrifos was not re-registered by the state about five years ago, removing an earlier insect-management tool.

On paraquat specifically, Bradshaw said it is one of several tools growers use and that removing it could push some growers to alternative herbicides or more labor-intensive mechanical management—each with different risks. He cautioned that some wholesale growers rely on paraquat early in orchard life to protect young trees from damage by other herbicides.

Committee members asked about the prevalence of paraquat use and a commonly cited figure of roughly 100–some gallons statewide. Bradshaw said private applicators may not report usage to the state and that sales data are a different reporting stream; he recommended the agency be asked to clarify reported volumes. The committee scheduled agency testimony to address usage and sales reporting.

Bradshaw closed by urging policymakers to consider the vulnerability of high-density orchard systems and to plan transitions that preserve tree health and long-term viability if particular herbicides are restricted.

The committee thanked Bradshaw for the presentation and scheduled follow-up testimony from agency staff the next business day.