Algonquin Pesticides Upset Parents - Spraying done near day-care facility

Subject: Algonquin Pesticides Upset Parents - Spraying done near day-care facility
Date:     Tue, 18 Jun 2002 11:31:35 -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

Dear Mr. Helliker, I thought you might like to read an article dated; Tuesday, June 18, 2002 from The Ottawa Citizen entitled: Algonquin Pesticides Upset Parents - Spraying done near day-care facility.

Parents who entrust their children to Algonquin College's day-care centre fear the use of pesticides outside the centre's play area is putting their childrens' health at risk.

On June 1, the college sprayed its grounds with Par III pesticides, including an area less than six metres from the early learning centre at the college's Woodroffe campus. Fifty-five pre-school children spend several hours a day playing outside the centre in an enclosed space separated from the treated area by a chain link fence.

Par III, a phenoxy herbicide, contains the chemicals 2,4-D, dicamba and mecoprop. A 200-page House of Commons environment and sustainable development committee report released in May 2000 acknowledged that 2,4-D is a potential carcinogen as shown in tests with laboratory animals. The chemical is used in 25 per cent of pesticides in Canada.

Cindy De Cuypere, the mother of a 21/2-year-old boy who attends the centre, yesterday submitted a petition to college president Robert Gillett signed by 39 parents and caregivers.

"I feel this is not an acceptable risk," said Ms. De Cuypere. "Children are much more vulnerable to this kind of chemical."

The petition demands that Mr. Gillett "immediately reverse your order to use chemical pesticides at the campus and thereby ensure that our children, their caregivers, and others do not suffer potentially serious health risks for the sake of the appearance of your lawn."

Ms. De Cuypere said she noticed the signs on May 30 when she went to pick up her son Nicholas. The signs warned of chemical treatments over the next two days. She voiced her concern to Algonquin administration members and subsequently the spraying was limited to Saturday, when the children were not near the site. But when Ms. De Cuypere pressed officials for further explanation, she said she felt ignored.

"I don't think this is a good corporate or community example on the part of the college," said Ms. De Cuypere.

Mr. Gillett was out of town and unable to respond. Mike Rushton, the college's director of physical resources, said the college took steps to safeguard the children, leaving a nine-metre buffer around the early learning centre.

"We know that's an area where our parents are sensitive about the potential impacts of these pesticides on their children, so we were very conscious of that and took it into account when we were doing our work," said Mr. Rushton.

This was the first time in four years the college has used pesticides on its grounds because of opposition, but now a "significant infestation" of white grubs and dandelions has forced the college to take action.

Although he is sympathetic to parents and plans to discuss the issue with them, Mr. Rushton said the grounds would have to be treated again on July 1, this time with the granular pesticide Merit.

The City of Ottawa banned the use of pesticides on public property in April 2001, and the city's public education campaign about lawn care alternatives is now under way.

But the ads, showing happy babies playing on safe green lawns, now seem ironic says Rick Vail, whose 11-month-old daughter, Kimberley, is also enrolled at the centre.

He said if the treatments continued, he and his wife would consider taking Kimberley out of day care. Ms. De Cuypere has also asked staff to keep her son inside as much as possible.

Peggy Land, co-chairwoman of the Campaign for Pesticide Reduction, testified before the Commons committee that overexposure to Par III can cause "loss of appetite, nausea, vomiting, general tenseness, muscular weakness, breathing difficulties, marked eye irritation and corneal injury."

A December 2001 Decima poll showed 82 per cent of Ottawa residents support banning pesticide use on public property and more than 50 per cent believe the chemicals are harmful to children and animals.

Proponents of the use of pesticides argue there are also health concerns surrounding banning the practice. Children and adults with severe allergies, for example, can suffer respiratory problems when certain weeds are not controlled.

Councillor Alex Cullen has lobbied the federal government to amend legislation to ban the use of pesticides on private property. More than 50 other cities in the country are considering such bylaws.

Photo: With pesticides being used a few metres from the day-care centre their children attend, Rick Vail, foreground, fears for the safety of daughter Kimberly, while Cindy De Cuypere and husband Glenn Cheney express concern for son Nicholas.

Well Mr. Helliker, I used to hear coaches say they had to spray the fields to kill weeds so their football players would not get hurt. I embarrassed every coach that I ever heard make that kind of statement simply by stating the question in reverse, "If your players are so weak and/or clumsy they will trip on a little weed and hurt their little selves; I would suggest that an actual competitive game would probably kill them. Killing weeds with volatile pesticide POISONS to help people "breathe" is almost as ludicrous. Respectfully, Stephen L. Tvedten

If you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing information on pesticides, Email Us..

Nontoxic Products Recommended by Steve Tvedten

Now Available

Safe 2 Use Products and Services