[Legislative Update] Watchful Eye

On Nov. 17, 2005, the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal by CropLife Canada against a bylaw enacted in Toronto banning lawn care use of pesticides. The bylaw, passed in 2003, prohibits homeowners and applicators from using synthetic lawn and garden pesticides within the city limits of Toronto; however, municipal and institutional uses are not affected. Opponents of the Toronto bylaw argue that pesticides are already regulated by Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) and local regulation is unnecessary and can deprive the public of these useful products. This appeal was the final opportunity for CropLife Canada to stop enforcement of this statute.

HEADING SOUTH? Although this decision does not directly affect Canadian pest control operators, industry members in Canada are watching the developments closely. “Once (the activists) have done the damage with the turf industry, it’s only a matter of time before they turn it on us,” Toronto-area pest control operator Michael Goldman said. “I personally think that (the Toronto city officials) are making a big mistake by not allowing the landscape industry to treat for bugs when they feel it’s necessary. First of all, they are licensed so they know better than anybody when and what should be treated, but by treating the exterior of a house, the PCOs are also potentially killing mosquito larvae and live mosquitoes which carry West Nile and other insects that could potentially cause problems. There are a number of results that are good byproducts of the responsible application of pesticides.” Goldman is president of Purity Pest Control Ltd. and Common Scents Solutions, a pest inspection company.
Industry officials in the United States are also monitoring the situation in Canada. Frank Gasperini, director of state issues for RISE (Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment), cautions that these activist successes in Canada are a danger to the industry in the United States. “The issue is the victories that the activists have had predominantly with lawn care in Canada have both trained them and encouraged the activist community,” he said. “They are openly talking about bringing such bans to the U.S.”
Gasperini said these attacks are focused on the cosmetic use of pesticides, but ultimately he believes the entire pest control community is at risk. “They will say they only want to ban cosmetic uses, but once they get that ban, they will start working on other segments of the industry next,” he said.
“It is my very firmly held opinion that they will eventually attack the pest control community once they get some bans in place on other kinds of users,” Gasperini added.
Bob Rosenberg, senior vice president of the National Pest Management Association echoes that belief. “I think most of the Canadian PCOs are aware and have tried to get involved,” he said. “They know, as we in the U.S. know, it starts in one place and will certainly roll over into the pest control industry. It’s a real serious problem.”
Rosenberg stresses that activists tend to focus their efforts in areas where current decision makers favor their cause. “When they have a line-up like they currently have (on the federal level), which is not terribly sympathetic to their positions, the activists just take their resources and go to a different playing field where they can be effective, which lately, has been in the courts and local municipalities.”
According to Rosenberg, the ability of local municipalities to make quick decisions on issues complicates the industry’s ability to fight these bans. “In a local jurisdiction, it is not uncommon for a commissioner or a council member to talk to us on a Tuesday and have something enacted into law on a Wednesday night,” he said.
Currently, the Ministry of Environments in Canada allows the treatment of the exterior of a building by structural pest control applicators if the pest problem inhibits the enjoyment of a structure. Goldman said he believes this stipulation creates a bond between the structural and lawn care operators.
“The structural industry has been fighting with the turf and land industries for awhile now because it’s only a matter of time before (the activists) turn their attentions on us. Yes, the attacks on the lawn care industry are a concern for us,” he said.

WHAT TO DO? How should industry members prepare for the possibility of anti-pesticide attacks? Gasperini recommends that operators be aware of the situation and share stories with local communities. “If you are a local business owner or a local branch manager, make sure that the mayor and some of the key county supervisors know who you are, know a little bit about your business and the good works you are doing, and make sure they understand the value you are providing the community. Maybe then they will think about you before they make a decision based on misinformation.”
Gasperini also advises when challenges are proposed, operators must get involved in the process. “When we have been involved in local fights, it’s been local lawn care and local pest control operators, in general, who have been the best defenders of the industry and the most effective.”
An educational campaign was launched last spring by the Toronto Public Health Department promoting the benefits of a pesticide-free lawn. The “Go Natural” campaign will continue through spring 2006. First time offenders of the bylaw will receive warnings. Beginning in September 2007, subsequent offenses will result in fines of $250.

The author is a Cleveland, Ohio-based freelance writer and former communications manager for RISE. She can be reached at khincke@giemedia.com.