[See Audio and Pdf document at bottom of Post]
Does the pesticide ban work?
by Dianne Saxe on June 15, 2010
Does the ban on cosmetic pesticides work?
Ontario’s ban came into effect on April 22, 2009. Since then, there has been a dramatic decline in the concentration of pesticides in urban watercourses – according to a study released by the Coalition for a Healthy Ottawa. In the summers of 2008 and 2009 (the year before and after the ban took effect), staff from the Ministry of Environment and five conservation authorities conducted a water quality monitoring study of ten urban streams and creeks, and tested them for as many as 105 pesticides and breakdown products. Preliminary results show that in 2009, concentrations of the three most popular cosmetic pesticides dropped by more than 80 per cent: 2,4D reduced the most by 86 per cent followed by dicamba (82 per cent) and MCPP (2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid; 78 per cent).
Approximately 80 per cent of more than 300 retailers and lawn care companies are believed to be complying with the ban. An enforcement program is rolling out to deal with the remaining 20 per cent.
Tagged as: ban, banning, biology, concentration, cosmetic, cosmetics, dicamba, effects, environment, environmental effects of pesticides, environmental law, herbicides, immediate, improvements, lawn, monitoring, Ontario, Ontario environmental law, pesticide, Pesticides, pesticides produce, soil contamination, study, urban, Water pollution, water quality
Here are the Key Points of the Study:
Selection criteria for watersheds included:
• High proportion of urban/residential land cover
• No point sources (e.g. sewage treatment plants)
• Limited agriculture
• No golf courses (with a few exceptions)
Concentrations of glyphosate in urban stream water did not change before and after the ban. While cosmetic uses of glyphosate were prohibited under the ban, certain uses for health and safety purposes were permitted such as controlling poisonous plants. Pesticide products containing glyphosate were still commercially available after the ban took effect. The ongoing availability and use of glyphosate was likely the reason that concentrations did not change.
Over 20 pesticides products containing carbaryl were banned under the cosmetic pesticides ban. Average carbaryl concentrations in urban stream water decreased following the ban; however, the difference before and after the ban was not statistically significant.
2,4-D dropped by 86 per cent; dicamba by 82 per cent and MCPP (2-methyl-4-chlorophenoxyacetic acid) by 78 per cent.
If we are to scrutinize chemicals traces measured at say 1ppb or 1ppt (1 part per trillion), Talk about scientific.
We should by now be able to measure at least 1 (as in 1 whole, not trillionth of a part) beneficial change in Environmental or Health impacts relating to the ban of these chemicals.
Why would Glyphosate be at the same level before and after the tests? No Commercial Applicator usage except for Noxious Weeds usage must equate to a certain percentage of change (Majority of availability was to homeowners only, at local retailers, a diluted version (less Active Ingredient= less product used))? Roundup is only registered for noxious weeds, not driveway and patio weeding anymore.
Why would Carbaryl levels be the same, this product was banned?
Where did the report come from? Who provided this to The Coalition. This reminds me of when Gideon Forman comments to the media the status of the Ontario Pesticide Ban before the government announces it.
Do you think the Coalition for a Healthy Ottawa spiked the creeks with 2,4-D before the Moe Testing?
Do you think certain members of the MOE (who happen to be friends with Dianne Saxe) needs to come up with a valid SCIENTIFIC reason to ban HEALTH CANADA APPROVED PRODUCTS or face pending Criminal Charges?
Finally, Did anyone mention the actual levels at which these products were detected at and what safe levels were comparatively?
It will be interesting to see the full report. I am curious as to the data on the other 100+ chemicals in the local creeks, behind the house, where the kids and the pets play.
AUDIO CLIP: CBC NEWS REPORT (Gideon Forman and John Gerretsen Interview)