Archive for the ‘Legislation’ Category

Fertilizer and Water Quality

Wednesday, February 16th, 2011

Most homeowners are becoming increasingly more aware of how their actions in regards to home maintenance, lawn care and more influence the environment around them. This is good news – we all need to play our part in protecting the world in which we live. However, it’ also important to have the full story – and not rely on “myths” – when making these decisions.

For example, some homeowners have stopped fertilizing their lawns due to a belief that fertilizer use increases phosphorus run-off into groundwater and other water resources. However, recent research by the University of Minnesota demonstrates that properly fertilized lawns have healthy root systems, which do a better job of holding soil in place than the root systems of non-fertilized lawns. As a result, an unfertilized lawn actually has more phosphorus run-off than a lawn that is fertilized. This holds true even when fertilizers with large amounts of phosphorus are used.

An unfertilized lawn loses its density and exposes soil, which leads to erosion and loss of nutrients. A fertilized lawn holds the soil in place, meaning less loss of nutrients and less phosphorus run-off.

Brian Horgan, Ph.D., associate professor at the University of Minnesota and extension turfgrass specialist said, “If you don’t fertilize your lawn thinking you’re doing better, you’re actually doing a lot more harm than if you properly fertilize your turf.”

Interested in learning more about the University of Minnesota experiment? Check out this video, as Dr. Horgan gives more details about his research.

“The only way to take those weeds out for good is with pesticides”

Tuesday, May 18th, 2010

Media coverage about pesticide bans in Canada is popping up like the dandelions are popping up in the resident’s yards. Recent articles in the Guelph Mercury and the National Post give insight on how quickly yards are going from green to yellow and how weeds are uncontrollable without the option of using effective herbicide products.

 Two years ago, the City of Guelph banned landscaping companies from using pesticides, a bylaw that was recently extended to all residents in the province.  Marty Kendall is part of a family lawn care company that lost 30 percent of its business when the ban came into effect and from his understanding, “the only way to take those weeds out for good is with pesticides.” He also added that “lawns are a competition for space, so if you don’t take the weeds out, the weeds will win the war.”

 Murray Cameron is the city’s manager of parkland and greenways and he admits that weeds are something that people “are just going to have to accept. We do our best but in some ways, it’s the new esthetic. You have to get used to the weeds.”  In order to control the weeds without the use of pesticides, the amount of physical labor increases. Seasonal workers have to cut the grass every 10 business days in an attempt to chop the heads off the dandelions before they seed.

 The National Post in Ontario wrote about residents having the same problem. “It took a while for the full impact of this ban to become apparent,” the article stated. “Now, however, the weeds are here to stay. Forever. Residential streetscapes have switched from green to yellow. To white and fluffy. And back to yellow again.”

 The article also states that there is no scientific evidence that government-regulated pesticides, when used correctly, pose any threat to human health, which means the entire effort to ban pesticides was unnecessary.

Even though the Pest Management Regulatory Agency said that the ban was for “our children’s health,” unchecked weeds are causing problems on lawns, parks, school yards and sports fields. When it rains, fields are becoming a “slippery, muddy bog” since there isn’t lush grass to act as a sponge for rainwater. When it’s hot, the surface becomes like concrete, and parents are concerned about the increase of skinned elbows and twisted ankles.

When these bans were proposed,  many residents didn’t consider the unintended consequences. Once they realized the end result, there has been a shift in attitudes toward the effort.  Let us know what you think – would you be okay with “getting used to the weeds?”

Connecticut Considers IPM Legislation

Thursday, May 6th, 2010

The Connecticut State Legislature is currently considering House Bill 5418, a bill that would implement an integrated pest management (IPM) program in Connecticut schools. The bill would ensure the necessary control of harmful pests on school grounds, and provide children with a safe learning environment.

Opponents of the bill have been active in attempts to stop the legislation. The opposition’s stance, however, is based on emotion, not science.  HB 5418 gives schools the ability to strategically and effectively control pest problems on school grounds.

If you are a Connecticut resident, support this bill by contacting  your state legislator. Even if you don’t live in Connecticut, you can support the proper use of pesticide products by signing our online petition.

Attention Florida Homeowners!

Wednesday, May 5th, 2010

The Florida State Senate is considering a bill (Senate Bill 382), which would limit the authority of individual municipalities to ban the sale of lawn and landscape fertilizers. This is an opportunity for Florida to pass science-based urban fertilizer regulation,  and prevent localities from passing fertilizer bans not backed by science, such as the one in Pinellas County.

The bill would revise language in the Model Ordinance for Florida-Friendly Fertilizer Use on Urban Landscapes. The revision would prevent local governments from adopting more stringent restrictions without demonstrating a need through a comprehensive, science-based program.

 If you are a Florida resident, contact your Senator and support this legislation. This is an opportunity to protect your ability to care for your home and lawn, which helps protect your property’s value and the environment.

Be sure to spread the word – share this information with friends, family, colleagues, or neighbors. Take action now by sending an e-mail to your state senator.

New York State School Boards Association Opposes the Foley Bill

Monday, April 12th, 2010

 S.4983-C (Foley) A.7937-C (Englebright)
Senate Calendar330
Assembly 3rd Reading

 AN ACT to amend the environmental conservation law,
in relation to prohibit the use of certain toxic chemicals for law and grounds maintenance

On behalf of nearly 700 school districts and 5,000 locally elected school officials, the New York State School Boards Association (NYSSBA) OPPOSES S.4983-A/A.7937-A. 

School districts have been extremely responsive to student exposure to chemicals and pesticides, as evidenced by the recent green cleaning product and integrated pest management laws.  Student health and safety is of paramount concern to schools statewide.  School districts are continuously mindful of weighing benefits and risks when making decisions that effect students’ health and safety.

Additionally, school districts are attentive to the time when pesticides are applied.  In order to limit exposure the application of pesticides typically takes places over the summer months, or at least during other periods when school is not in session. The sponsor’s memo indicates that currently students are being harmed — if this is in fact true, we would appreciate knowing immediately which districts are putting students at risk.

Facility maintenance and the use of pesticides is a unique function that can only be fully analyzed and determined at the local level.  The local school districts know best the schedule, circumstances and the interests of the community.  These are the local factors that must be weighed when deciding how to best use pesticides.

The sponsor’s memo also reports that pesticides are used for the sake of appearances, when in fact the truth is pesticides are used to preserve the condition of playing fields.  School playing fields are subject to near constant use, unlike other fields such as little league or community parks.  School playing fields are used for multiple purposes and shared year round between sports like football, soccer, lacrosse, baseball and physical education classes.  The concern to schools is not about being pretty but rather about keeping the fields functional and in good repair for student use and enjoyment.

This bill creates a mandate on school districts at a time when massive cuts and added pressures are being placed upon school districts.  The last thing school districts need right now is another unfunded directive from the state.  The costs associated with the training and materials needed to comply with this mandate would contribute to the deep and drastic cuts of personnel, programs and services that schools will surely need to make in the coming months.

School districts have always put students at the heart of all decisions.  This bill fails to recognize the importance of local control and the necessity of prohibiting unfunded mandates.  For these reasons the New York State School Boards Association urges the members of the committee to vote no to this bill.

For additional information, please contact David Little, Director of Governmental Relations, at 518-783-0200 or via email at david.little@nyssba.org.