Toronto's Steps to Ban Pesticides
Subject: Two articles on Toronto's Steps to Ban Pesticides.................
Date: TTue, 17 Jul 2001 11:43:12 -0400
From: Stephen Tvedten <steve@getipm.com>
Organization: Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)
To: Paul Helliker <phelliker@cdpr.ca.gov>
Director, State of
California, Department of Pesticide Regulation
cc: Christine Whitman whitman.christine@epa.gov
Dear Mr. Helliker, I thought you might like to read an artilce entitled: Proud to be pesticide-free.
Dear Mr. Helliker, I thought you might like to read this article from: The Globe and Mail, dated: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 - Page A1 entitled: Toronto takes steps to ban pesticides within 2 years By Martin Mittelstaedt.
The City of Toronto has taken its first steps to ban pesticides used on lawns for cosmetic purposes.
Amid warnings that weeds and grubs will soon get the upper hand, the board of health voted yesterday to endorse a bylaw that would end the cosmetic use of pesticides on lawns and gardens, likely within two years.
City health authorities worry that pesticides may cause cancer, particularly among children, and want spraying around homes stopped.
"We're at the beginning of a process where the city is going to look at . . . phasing out pesticides on private property," said Joe Mihevc, a city councillor who chairs the board of health.
Toronto is the first big city trying to phase out pesticides since the Supreme Court last month upheld a bylaw by the Quebec community of Hudson restricting weed and bug killers. Under Toronto's approach, the spraying of lawns by homeowners to kill such weeds as dandelions would not be allowed, although there may be exceptions, such as for pesticide use to kill allergy-causing plants.
The deliberations in Toronto likely will be repeated across the country, as communities react to the court ruling.
Environmental groups are pushing for bylaws restricting pesticides in 11 other Ontario communities. Those include Ottawa, London and Kitchener, and smaller communities such as Stratford and Milton.
From the tone of debate in Toronto, it's clear that the discussions will be acrimonious. Pesticide supporters, worried that a phaseout will cost them their jobs, jeered yesterday at a politician who argued for the ban.
Some horticulturists expressed worry yesterday that the city is trying to take away "tools" that keep unwanted plants and insects at bay. "The public is not going to accept weeds and grubs," said Tony DiGiovanni, spokesman for Landscape Ontario, a horticultural trade association.
Yesterday, Mr. Mihevc said the city wants to proceed slowly. "We're not looking to ram anything down anyone's throat." The city, he said, will try to have "a rational, reasonable" approach.
Some politicians have expressed concern that the city will appear unkempt, if weeds proliferate.
John Filion, another councillor, said many residents tell him that the city, which has phased out most pesticides in parks, looks dowdy. "The weeds are out of control, and I don't take the complaints of the residents on that lightly."
Mr. Filion accused fellow councillors of intolerance with their desire to ban practices they find objectionable. They "couldn't care less what the average person out there thinks."
For residents worried about the health consequences of herbicides and insecticides, ending their use can't come fast enough.
Douglas Counter, an Etobicoke organic gardener whose rare plants have been featured in garden publications, yesterday recounted to city politicians his horror when a lawn-care company this spring hosed down his yard with pesticides by mistake.
"I am outraged," he told city politicians yesterday. He said it will take three years before his lot is considered organic again, and he is angry that the spray company claims its product is safe. "In fact, the manager said the chemicals are so safe he could drink the formula right out of his truck."
Mr. DiGiovanni of the horticulture association is concerned that some of the 7,000 to 12,000 people who work among the 1,200 companies licensed in Ontario to spray lawns could lose jobs.
Cheryl Chour of the Organic Landscape Alliance doesn't agree. She said companies in her trade association can't keep up with demand from homeowners who hate bug and weed sprays.
"Most OLA members are experiencing growth upwards of 30 per cent a year for the last several years," she said. "Far from putting people out of work, a pesticide restriction would encourage the growth of an economically and environmentally sustainable industry."
The city has been pondering a ban for years but didn't act because of uncertainly over whether municipalities have the legal right to impose restrictions. The Supreme Court ruling eliminated that doubt.
"Municipalities have been given the green light. Toronto and cities across Canada must commit to restricting the use of pesticides for cosmetic purposes," said Rich Whate of the Toronto Environmental Alliance.
Source url; http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/GIS.Servlets.HTMLTemplate?tf=tgam/common/FullStory.html&cf=tgam/common/FullStory.cfg&configFileLoc=tgam/config&vg=BigAdVariableGenerator&date=20010717&dateOffset=&hub=nationalToronto&title=Toronto&cache_key=nationalToronto¤t_row=2&start_row=2&num_rows=1
===============================================================
The other article appeared today, Tuesday, July 17, 2001 in the Toronto Sun and is entitled: Lawns to come clean - Pesticide ban in works By GEORGE CHRISTOPOULOS, CITY HALL BUREAU.
The first step in a city-wide plan to ban Toronto homeowners from spraying chemical bug and weed killers on their lawns cleared its first hurdle yesterday.
The city's board of health endorsed a motion that begins a process of phasing out pesticide and herbicide use for cosmetic purposes.
However, board chairman Joe Mihevc said the bylaw "is not going to happen overnight" and may have to be phased in over a number of years.
"We are about 90% to 95% of the way there on public property and now we're taking the next logical step to restrict pesticide use on private property," Mihevc said. "What we want to do is proceed in a rational, reasonable manner putting in place the kinds of protections people are really insisting that we put in place."
'HISTORICAL'
Mihevc said the board was buoyed by a recent Supreme Court decision to uphold a 1991 municipal bylaw passed in Hudson, Que., which restricted pesticide use.
"The possible regulation of cosmetic pesticides fulfills (the) mandate to promote a healthy urban environment," he said.
"Years from now, Torontonians will look back to this decision as having positive historical significance."
Source url: http://www.canoe.ca/TorontoNews/ts.ts-07-17-0033.html
Well Mr. Helliker, it is becoming more and more clear that most people want to be free of your "registered" POISONS. The other thing that becomes very clear, at least to me, is what is not done for love is done for money. Once again I am asking you to: "Protect the People and Not the POISON Profits."
Respectfully, Stephen L. Tvedten
If you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing information on pesticides, please email us at list@safe2use.com with "subscribe" in the subject line.