|
Pesticide bylaw concerns
Regarding the Mayor's Report, 'Getting the answers you need,' by Marolyn Morrison, published in the Caledon Citizen July 25.
An Ottawa writer, I am Canadian honorary observer with the Pesticide Working Group in Washington.
While Caledon was one of the first municipalities to establish a pesticide bylaw, it is one of the weakest and most inadequate from among about 130 of such bylaws in Canada. A frivolous urban exposure to toxic
chemicals, especially harmful to young children, is just as inadvisable in May, June and September as it is in July and August.
After all, there are alternatives. This writer has a weedless lawn maintained without the use of pesticides which, after all, came into vogue only a few decades ago, and from time immemorial lawns were maintained using non-toxic methods: mowing high, overseeding and applying an organic fertilizer that is non-toxic to beneficial organisms in the soil.
I am also concerned about the reference to a "qualified IPM applicator."
Such applicators are altogether too eager to apply pesticides. IPM is also aptly described as "increased pesticide marketing." An urban IPM is used as a ploy on the part of the industry to forestall the passing of meaningful and effective pesticide bylaws. No apparent reductions in urban pesticide use are likely to be achieved using IPM, a means for the chemical lawn application companies to retain an absolute control over lawn maintenance.
K. Jean Cottam, PhD
Nepean, Ontario
| 
