Chris Lemcke offered a perfect analogy to lawn care professionals in the United States in an article he recently wrote on
pesticide regulation for Turfgrass Producers International's Turf News.
The technical coordinator of Weed Man USA said, "Although our businesses continue to grow in Canada, the activists are winning
the political battle in demonizing our industry, and we're behind the train fighting what they're saying. The United States
still has the opportunity to be in front of the train, with the activists at the back."
At least the Canadian lawn care professionals are on the train now; before, it seemed they were tied to the tracks, ready
to get run over. But the weary yet urgent message from the Canadian lawn care industry to the U.S. lawn care industry is clear:
Learn from us. Learn from our mistakes.
PLCAA: Not taking things lightly
|
A little history Almost as long as pesticides have been around, there have been people protesting them. But the current battle the Canadian
lawn care industry is embroiled in began in 1991 when the small community of Hudson, Quebec decided to pass a bylaw banning
the "cosmetic" or "non-essential" use of pesticides. The bylaw exempted golf courses and agriculture, leaving the lawn care
industry to fight on its own.
In 1992, two companies, Spraytech and Chemlawn (now Greenspace Services), were cited with violating the bylaw and sued Hudson,
challenging the municipality's authority "to forbid an activity legally authorized by a federal or provincial law." The Quebec
court ruled in favor of Hudson, and the companies appealed to the Quebec Superior Court, which supported the decision.
Spraytech and Chemlawn then brought the case to the Supreme Court of Canada, which granted leave to appeal in 1999. In 2001,
the Court upheld Hudson's bylaw.
Weed Man CEO Roger Mongeon protests with other LCOs at Toronto city hall.
|
The Supreme Court's decision was largely considered a roundhouse blow, but before it came a series of rabbit punches. After
Hudson passed its bylaw, numerous other municipalities began enacting their own pesticide bans or restrictions, all with their
own unique set of rules. Some allowed the use of pesticides only from 8 a.m. to 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.; others allowed
pesticide use only during spring and fall and not in summer when school was out. This created a serious headache for lawn
care operators who had to deal with many different municipalities in their area.
Meanwhile, homeowners started making their own pesticide applications. The reason they were able to do this is because the
federal government regulates the sale of consumer products and the local municipalities couldn't stop the sale of those products
but could make them illegal to use. Despite this, the Canadian lawn care industry claims that, to date, no homeowner has ever
been charged with violating the bylaw.
Following the Supreme Court's decision, activist groups began to request that municipalities across Canada adopt pesticide
bylaws. But this time the Canadian lawn care industry was ready. If it hadn't been for a customer letter campaign organized
by an industry-formed group called the Environmental Coalition of Ontario (ECO), Toronto might have become the first municipality
outside Quebec to pass a pesticide bylaw. Instead, the bylaw was postponed for review.
Once again, the Canadian lawn care industry claimed the media was attacking it. The first time it was the Montreal press;
this time it was the Toronto papers. To combat this, an effort was placed to develop an Integrated Pest Management or Plant
Health Care Accreditation process as a way to show environmental stewardship and a desire to reduce pesticide use.
Timeline
|
The Canadian lawn care industry was dealt yet another setback, however, when Halifax, Nova Scotia enacted a pesticide bylaw
in 2002. Halifax was the first significant city outside of Quebec to do this.
"[The industry] had nothing to offer the councilors, who were in the middle and needed some sort of compromise position,"
says Lemcke. "It was either business as usual or a ban, and the council voted to enact a phased-in ban on pesticides."
The opposite was true in Ontario, however. The ECO had plenty to offer to city councils as it set up a list serve of people
in the lawn care industry who were willing to represent the industry in court at a moment's notice.
"We were having a huge impact on most municipalities, and a lot of councilors were listening to our message of responsible
use and IPM accreditation," says Lemcke.
Just when Canadian lawn care professionals were feeling good about their actions, bad news hit. The small northern town of
Cobalt became the first Ontario municipality to pass a bylaw banning pesticides - without consulting with an environmental
committee or holding a debate.
More bad news On the heels of the Cobalt case came more bad news: in July 2002, the Quebec Minister of the Environment announced a proposed
Pesticide Management Code. The Code has a list of 28 active ingredients found in pesticides that the government plans on banning
for use on all private and commercial green spaces within three years.
Another setback followed in December when a member of Provincial Parliament introduced a bill to amend the Ontario Municipal
Act by prohibiting the use of pesticides in non-essential situations regardless of whether or not the scientific evidence
is conclusive. It died on the floor, but the lawn care industry is fearful a similar bill will pop up again in the future.
The spring of 2003 saw more smaller communities passing bylaws with little warning. On May 23, a council meeting was set in
Toronto to determine whether or not councilors would vote for a bylaw restricting the use of pesticides. The Toronto Environmental
Coalition (TEC), a subgroup of the ECO, hired a lobbyist who advised the TEC to launch an aggressive campaign to change council's
mind. Ads on the radio and in the local community newspapers soon followed, and lawn care companies were contacting customers
in their database to encourage them to call councilors and express their opinions.
LCOs contend activists "fearmonger" with ads like these.
|
The campaign apparently worked, with council members reporting that they had received 150 to 500 calls at their office. Still,
the thought was that the vote would be very close. On voting day, most of the companies in the TEC shut down and brought employees
to city hall with signs and T-shirts that read, "Don't Make Gardening a Crime." The bylaw ended up passing, but it wasn't
a complete ban as it still allowed for homeowners to rid their lawn of pests.
"Although the bylaw is unnecessary, expensive and unenforceable, the industry does agree with its 'responsible use' intent,"
says Lemcke. "The City of Toronto did recognize the professionalism of our industry by giving us an equal say on the committee
that will have the final say on how the bylaw will work."
The committee will have until April 2004 to come up with action thresholds to recommend to council for adoption into the bylaw.
In 2004, Toronto will have an education campaign, and the bylaw won't come into effect until September 2005.
