Municipal bylaw to reduce cosmetic/non-essential pesticide use on household lawns - a policy implementation evaluation

Abstract

BackgroundPesticide use on urban lawns and gardens contributes to environmental contamination and human exposure. Municipal policies to restrict use and educate households on viable alternatives deserve study. We describe the development and implementation of a cosmetic/non-essential pesticide bylaw by a municipal health department in Toronto, Ontario, Canada and assess changes in resident practices associated with bylaw implementation.MethodsImplementation indicators built on a logic model and were elaborated through key informant interviews. Bylaw impacts on awareness and practice changes were documented through telephone surveys administered seasonally pre, during and post implementation (2003-2008). Multivariable logistic regression models assessed associations of demographic variables and gardening season with respondent awareness and practices.ResultsImplementation indicators documented multiple municipal health department activities and public involvement in complaints from commencement of the educational phase. During the enforcement phases only 40 warning letters and 7 convictions were needed. The number of lawn care companies increased. Among survey respondents, awareness of the bylaw and the Natural Lawn campaign reached 69% and 76% respectively by 2008. Substantial decreases in the proportion of households applying pesticides (25 to 11%) or hiring lawn care companies for application (15 to 5%) occurred. Parallel absolute increases in use of natural lawn care methods occurred among households themselves (21%) and companies they contracted (7%).ConclusionsBylaws or ordinances implemented through education and enforcement are a viable policy option for reducing urban cosmetic pesticide use.

Development of a guide to applying precaution in local public health

“…This occurred with Toronto's pesticide bylaw that later became provincial law. 34 There are a number of levers that can be applied by local government and public health, although these will differ globally. Canadian municipalities have the general power (via provincial statutes such as the Municipal Act in Ontario) to make bylaws, including pesticide bylaws, regulating health and general welfare of their inhabitants, as was confirmed in a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2001.…”

“…Canadian municipalities have the general power (via provincial statutes such as the Municipal Act in Ontario) to make bylaws, including pesticide bylaws, regulating health and general welfare of their inhabitants, as was confirmed in a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2001. 34 In addition, boards of health and public health departments in Ontario are empowered to Like most frameworks, our guide does not include a particular trigger for precaution. The purpose of our guide is to stimulate discussion and ensure that all factors considered in applying precaution are used consistently and in a transparent manner.…”

“…1 Few of the programs were formally evaluated to assess their contribution to reduction of exposures, 45 except the pesticide bylaw. 34 We have focused on using our guide prospectively now to make decisions on applying precaution in situations of uncertainty. We have shared it with colleagues dealing with areas outside of environmental health.…”

“…Mechanisms tended to be more extensive and systematic for issues with broader import and impact, and where there had been a political directive for stakeholder consultation such as the one that occurred with the pesticide bylaw. 34 For issues of more circumscribed importance, such as with development of the fish consumption guidance, engagement mechanisms were strategic and targeted (e.g. meetings with expert academics, government ministries, and public health partners or focus groups with women in TPH prenatal nutrition programs).…”

A Review of Weed Control Practices in Landscape Planting Beds: Part I–Nonchemical Weed Control Methods

“…Environmental and safety concerns have also caused an increased preference for ''environmentally friendly,'' integrated pest management (IPM), or nonchemical approaches to pest control in home landscapes and gardens (Matheny, 2009). Many municipalities in Canada and parts of the United States are now banning or restricting the use of herbicides and other ''cosmetic'' pesticides, specifically around schools and public buildings (Cole et al, 2011;Robbins and Sharp, 2003b;Sandberg and Foster, 2005). Due to these increasing regulations, many landscapers are being forced to control weeds using only nonchemical control strategies.…”