California Spends Over $20 Million to Save Endangered Trout—Then Sprays Poison in Their Creek

Added: 2026-05-12

[00:00:00]This is exactly what happens in LA. This is exactly what happens, you know, up in Sacramento where you have these contracts and people don't want to talk, they don't want to do anything cuz they want to keep their money in their pockets and they don't want to ruffle feathers.

[00:00:14]Not ruffling feathers.

[00:00:17]Yeah, that's me. Hi, I'm Haley Gomez and I'm an investigative reporter. You may be wondering what the hell I'm yelling about. Oh, and if you live in Orange County, you might want to listen in. But let me start from the beginning.

[00:00:36]Okay, here we are at the very, very beginning and for the last few weeks I have been investigating something that's been happening right here in my backyard which has to do with the creek and flood control channels that go straight into the ocean we all love, especially as Californians. And the first thing that I think we need to have a ground understanding of is glyphosate and the whole cocktail of chemicals that the county and OC public works has been spraying straight into our creek beds.

[00:01:01]So, what exactly is glyphosate?

[00:01:04]I feel like it's a term that many of us have been hearing because of Maha and the activists that have really set the alarm on these issues, especially with herbicides and pesticides. Now, in broader terms, you might know it as the main ingredient in Roundup. In a more detailed way, it is a broad-spectrum herbicide that basically nukes any green plant it touches by messing with how it grows.

[00:01:26]Let's nuke the bastards. But that's not the only one that the county uses. In fact, public records and the county's own national pollutant discharge elimination system, NPDES, reports show that they've been also hitting these channels with triclopyr, which targets woody plants and can linger in water, imazapyr, which is super effective at killing deep-rooted stuff and known to be pretty mobile in soil and water, 2,4-D, diquat dibromide, imazamox, and even algicides like sodium carbonate peroxyhydrate, plus surfactants and adjuvants that make everything stick better and spread farther. We're talking about >> 105,000 gallons of this mix dumped into Orange County waterways every single YEAR. GOD, OKAY, IT'S HAPPENING.

[00:02:11]EVERYBODY STAY CALM. WHAT'S THE SITUATION, EVERYONE? SAN JUAN CREEK alone will even spraying roughly 8 tons of herbicide diluted in water twice a year across roughly 30 acres of channel.

[00:02:22]And because these are engineered flood channels, when it rains or water flows, it goes directly downstream into the oceans and places like Doheny State Beach, where families swim, kids play in the sand, and surfers paddle every single day.

[00:02:39]>> [music] >> They're spraying across 380 plus miles flood channel countywide and have plans to treat more than 2,000 acres this year alone in dozens of waterways including Santa Ana River, all the ones that empty basically right into our beaches. And this whole investigation kicked off when my team and I had the opportunity to sit down with Creek Team. Now, they're a group of local residents who started noticing that the creeks were really, really bad.

[00:03:04]They were lifeless, birds were dying. I mean, the whole ecosystem looks completely dead when you go down to some of them. And they filed public records requests, they pulled receipts, and they blew the whistle on this earlier this year. And that's how we got pulled in.

[00:03:14]Now, we sat down with the Creek Team for almost an hour discussing how this whole thing kicked off for them. And one name that kept popping up over and over again was Supervisor Katrina Foley.

[00:03:24]She represents the Fifth District, which hits San Juan Capistrano, Dana Point, San Clemente, the exact areas that these creeks run through and where the Creek Team really started to see a lot of these effects. She's an attorney, former mayor of Costa Mesa, and won her seat back in 2021 during a special election.

[00:03:39]Now, if you want to know the full background story as to how things got pretty intense between Foley and the Creek Team, you can go check out our full interview with them on our YouTube.

[00:03:47]But, to summarize it shortly, the Creek Team had tried to warn the county and Katrina Foley about the issues that they were seeing within the creeks and the herbicide spraying. They were then ignored and so they went public with this information and put it on social media which picked up a lot of traction.

[00:04:00]And so that led to a really packed out town hall in Dana Point in March after this rising amount of public pressure.

[00:04:06]And that is also where we now can introduce OC Public Works. It's a department that actually manages all the flood control channels, roads, and vegetation across the county. And a name to specifically know because she pops up a little bit later on in the story is Amanda Carr. She's the deputy director of environmental resources for OC Public Works and she's one of the key people that was at the town hall. Now at that recent town hall, Foley straight up said that she opposes the use of herbicides in our public spaces and waterways and that she's always preferred using less herbicide. And she told the room that she had asked Public Works to halt spraying within her district's flood channels. And her pushback has been very recent since Creek team has come forward with her information. But here's where the story has holes that we're seeing.

[00:04:45]Here I come. Here I come. We found board meeting videos and records from 2021 and 2022 where the Board of Supervisors, including Foley, was dealing with herbicide contracts. In fact, in 2021's meeting, Foley had questions about the possibility of using non-toxic chemicals which she referred back to her time as former mayor in Costa Mesa. But Amanda Carr explained why the county uses the current approach that they have. Foley then had no objection and the board approved the contract.

[00:05:10]>> OC Public Works has active contracts with Habitat Restoration Sciences Inc.

[00:05:13]and Quality Sprayers Inc. for herbicides. Advisor Foley. Yes, thank you Mr. Chairman. I just had a couple questions for Ms. Carr or anyone up in the chamber now. So, I think we all agree we'd like to have less toxic substances being used for our It's my understanding that Orange County Public Works has a integrated management plan. Is that right?

[00:05:31]>> Yes, we have an integrated pest management plan for OC Public Works.

[00:05:33]Okay. And so, in looking at some of the cities in the county, I know that Irvine and Costa Mesa both have integrated pest management plans that utilize non-toxic substances. Do we have something that's similar to that that has a priority for non-toxic substances?

[00:05:49]Yes, in fact, that is the way our our most IPM programs work is you start with the least toxic option and you move through your evaluation process, but we always seek to use the least toxic options. Um however, in contrast to some of the cities, because the county and the flood control district maintain aquatic areas with our within our flood control channels, often times we are very limited in specific types of products that we're allowed to use under our permits from the state. Um and so we also have to keep those factors in mind as well, which often times if cities don't maintain those types of facilities, they aren't under the same restrictions that we are. Okay, and is there anything that you can provide to us in terms of what we can do more of if there's something that we need to address at a regulatory uh perspective to make change in some kind of regulatory procedure so that we can remove more and more of those toxic substances from our uh weed and pest abatement programs? Well, I I think it's important to understand that toxicity is not the only issue of concern, particularly when you are applying within aquatic uh areas. Um and in addition, most of the non-toxic products focus on desiccation or drying out of the plant.

[00:06:52]And that those products don't work in wet environments. So, you have to use products that are appropriate for the environment that you're applying them in, as well as the season and the effect that you're looking for. Um and often times some of the non-toxic products, while they are quote unquote non-toxic, they are then actually very caustic material. So, there are other risks beyond toxicity that we have to keep taken into consideration, which we do have highly qualified staff um making these evaluations. We actually have um uh a PhD level staffer um who is managing our IPM program. So, we do very thorough evaluations, but often times there are very site-specific considerations that we have to keep into consideration.

[00:07:29]>> And it was the same contract that was renewed again in 2022. So, even though public works stopped using glyphosate in San Juan and Trabuco channels back in January 2025, they kept approving the use of other chemicals like triclopyr and imazapyr up until the full pause that came after the pressure in March.

[00:07:44]>> [laughter] >> This is crazy. This is crazy. This is crazy. And so all of that leads me to the moment that I showed at the beginning of this video, which was me yelling in my car about lab testing. So at the very start of this, my team and I wanted to take our own independent samples and test the soil and water from the creeks. And we wanted to do these samples because yes, the county does run their own samples, but only after a certain point during their spring. And in fact, during that March town hall, Amanda Carr admitted that some of the lab data they rely on had been falsified. I'm sorry, what did he say?

[00:08:14]Actual lab results were marked down invalid under endangered species act guidelines, but in her presentation they were shown as negative or clean. And there hadn't been proper soil sampling in these channels for something along the lines of like 20 years. So with the help of the creek team, we collected our own samples and tried to get them to be tested by any lab at this point in the county. Here, 8 lb, 6 oz newborn infant Jesus. And our first stop was Weck Lab.

[00:08:39]I had gotten in contact with the lab and we were set to hand off the samples. I had gotten a full list with the help of the creek team for chemicals to have them run through. Some of which were the same as what the county test for, but some of them were outside of that as well because Rob from the creek team has an extensive background in science. And so I had given over the sheet. This was my one minimal flaw within this entire thing. In that sheet, I had not seen that on the third page there was lab recommendations, and one of the recommendations was to not use Weck. But we wanted to use Weck because we thought if there was any pushback from the county, again, we could say, "Well, it's the same lab that the county uses, therefore it can't be invalid."

[00:09:14]>> That's smart thinking, Bob. And so as I was driving there 20 minutes before I got into the lab, I had gotten a call from my contact. They were running through the chemicals that we wanted to look for, and they had also pointed out that there was a recommendation to not use their lab. I had said, "Just ignore that. That was from the team that we were working with, but we as a reporter, I am okay with using you guys." And so I was told that these chemicals were pretty bad and that a lot of people were actually looking for them.

[00:09:36]That's interesting. So I said, "Great, let's do whatever we can. Now, I get to the lab and things were very, very different from when I had talked on the phone. In fact, I showed [music] up and was waiting for my contact to come down and as soon as they came down, they said, "Hey, we passed this off to the sales team to get you guys a quote and they actually are concerned about their contracts." What the hell are you talking about?

[00:09:55]>> So, I was obviously baffled at the fact that someone would just so openly admit that their contracts were more important than an independent study being done.

[00:10:04]And I then offered for them to go off record that if we used their labs, we wouldn't name the lab at all. And was told that it was not their choice, it was the sales team and they were concerned about the backlash if something had come up. And it turns out that Weck is a part [music] of a multi-lab contract with OC Public Works and it has been for its water quality analytical services.

[00:10:23]>> Money, money, money.

[00:10:24]>> And that contract was actually just renewed for two more years at up to $2.7 million, bringing [music] the cumulative total to about >> $5.9 million total. So, then from there, I got referred to Eurofins and [music] was once again told that they had concerns about the contracts with their clients.

[00:10:45]And when I had asked Eurofins exactly which clients they were concerned about, I had gotten no response. They emailed her three times and still no response.

[00:10:54]>> Just like Weck, Eurofins has its ongoing contracts and subcontracts with Orange County for environmental testing services. Though the exact dollar amount on their specific county deal isn't spelled [music] out in the same public renewal documents that we had found for Weck. So, after that, it was a chase to find [music] which lab would exactly test our samples.

[00:11:12]>> Can anyone help me? We ended up going to six different labs. Some said that they couldn't run the full panel that we needed because they just didn't have the resources that they needed to [music] run those tests for and others were just rude about it and said that they could only do a portion. So, when I asked what would that portion look like, I got responses like this.

[00:11:30]>> OH MY GOD. SO, THE BIG QUESTION became why the wall? [music] I mean, these labs have contracts and subcontracts with the county whose spraying program we're trying to independently test. And that [music] creates an obvious conflict, right?

[00:11:42]>> Sixth grader could connect the dots.

[00:11:43]>> And so, because of that, I think it's worth noting [music] the actual rules that are supposed to govern this kind of herbicide spraying within our creeks and waterways. And that leads [music] us to the state.

[00:11:53]Under California's laws, the state [music] general national pollutant discharge elimination system permit, it allows certain aquatic herbicides to be used like life is a triclopyr, imazapyr, all the other chemicals that I had listed off earlier on top of more, and also adjuvants. [music] In order to go through this process, you have to file an aquatic pesticide application plan to do monitoring, reporting, and give public notice [music] in certain areas.

[00:12:16]>> Oh my god, I can't believe it.

[00:12:18]>> But, Orange County's permit was submitted back in [music] 2013. It then expired in 2018, and it's still running on an administrative continuation, [music] which Creek Team had notably pointed out to us. And just recently, the California Department of [music] Fish and Wildlife launched an investigation into potential violations of the Fish and Game Code [music] in San Juan Creek.

[00:12:37]>> Those boys could use some serious looking into. Here's the part that just feels like a sick joke [music] for a state that just loves environmental protections. Both San Juan Creek and Trabuco Creek are critical habitat for [music] Southern California steelhead trout.

[00:12:49]>> Wow.

[00:12:50]One of the rarest fish around with only about 177 [music] left in the wild.

[00:12:55]They're federally endangered and state listed as well. And these fish are supposed to migrate [music] up these exact creeks to spawn. Yet, the county's been spraying herbicides directly into their pathway even during migration windows, according [music] to records pulled by Creek Team. And at the same time, so conveniently, California has been pouring taxpayer dollars into fish passage [music] projects.

[00:13:16]>> SAVE THE FISH! WHAT ARE THOSE, YOU may ask? Well, it is a $14.6 million NOAA grant for nature-like [music] fishways on Trabuco Creek, which is part of the San Juan watershed. And another 9.3 from CDFW [music] Prop 68 for fish passage construction to open up 15 miles of habitat. And the creek team had said that they had tried to alert federal authorities about the entire issue, but it hadn't [music] stopped the program until public pressure.

[00:13:47]>> Interesting timing. Mhm. And so the irony just hits extremely hard, especially in a state like California, where environmental protections are slapped on almost everything. They take our tax dollars and spend millions on saving [music] steelhead while the fish have to swim through a literal chemical soup in a dead creek.

[00:14:02]>> Make it make sense.

[00:14:04]On top of that entire thing, despite the lack of soil testing, the county still moves sand around from places like [music] Santa Ana River all the way down to San Clemente beaches for replenishment. And whatever is in that sediment, if there is something, it gets [music] spread further down the coast.

[00:14:17]>> It's everywhere. So why care about this entire thing? I mean, I get it. People have lives. They have families. [music] It's overwhelming to keep up with everything that is going on. And studies show that glyphosate can stick around [music] in soil and sediment for years.

[00:14:29]And there have been massive court cases linking to non-Hodgkin's lymphomas [music] with huge settlements. Orange County is recently showing that it has the highest cancer incident rates for people under 50 in Southern California with roughly 98.3 cases per 100,000 residents with breast, [music] colon, and lung cancer leading the pack in roughly 2,000 cases a year in that age group. While overall cancer rates are still below the national average, the local numbers outpace [music] our neighboring communities. Experts have pointed to environmental factors, lifestyle changes, and better screening as possible drivers.

[00:15:00]>> This sucks. I know. We're not here to say that anyone is directly [music] poisoning the ocean or the people. I'm just reporting the records and the facts that have come up and the discrepancies and the questions that keep piling onto this investigation. Why the resistance against the independent testing? Why spray a critically endangered fish habitat while spending millions of dollars in taxpayer dollars specifically to "restore it"? And why the gap between what officials say and what the paperwork actually says?

[00:15:25]>> I have a few unanswered questions. The story is still unfolding because we still have to find a lab that will actually take our samples and test them properly.

[00:15:33]>> Somebody help me!

[00:15:35]And so a lot of this work, honestly, wouldn't have been able to come to light without the Creek Team and all the requests that they have done, the pressure that they've put on public officials. [music] This is something that is really important to them and to the community to bring to light. And so they have done amazing work. Again, check out our hour-long interview on YouTube with them. Highly recommend it to get the full background story of why they started speaking out. Also, if you feel like you've been affected by the herbicide spraying within Orange County, please reach out to us. I know that Creek Team has been in contact with a group of people who have already talked about their stories and the possible links of glyphosate to the issues that they've been having health-wise.

[00:16:09]>> Talk to us. We're still going to keep pressure on this because we still have some samples to run. So, I guess this is part one.

[00:16:18]>> [music]