Keep in mind that FIESTA HERBICIDE IS BEING USED AT 3 – 8 times per year to supress weeds.
This information has come from the Guelph Turfgrass Institute (Pam Charbonneau), local Product Suppliers and members of Landscape Ontario Lawn Care Commodity Group.
2 Applications of FIESTA with 2 follow up spot spraying applications is what you will hear.
In fact the label says ONLY 2 APPLICATIONS PER YEAR.
There are genuine concerns about IRON buildup in soil and human reactions to this product as you will hear in the audio below and Ministry of Environment EBR comment at the bottom of the page.
FIESTA was registered and deemed safe if the label directions were followed.
BUT THE LABEL IS NOT BEING FOLLOWED, BECAUSE FIESTA DOES NOT WORK WHEN FOLLOWING THE LABEL.
FIESTA HERBICIDE SHOULD BE DISCONTINUED IMMEDIATELY.
Force of Nature and NorahG talked about HemoChromatosis back in May 2010 Here:
Do you think MLA Scott Fraser reads Force of Nature??
BC legislature Nov 7, 2011 Cosmetic Pesticide Ban Audio:
MLA Fraser – Dangers of Iron Based Products
Environmental Registry
Decision on Instrument:
On April 30, 2010, the pesticide product Fiesta Lawn Weed Killer (Reg. No. 29535), containing the new active ingredient FeHEDTA, was classified and placed in Class 4 based on the recommendation of the Ontario Pesticides Advisory Committee. In making the decision to approve the classification of the product prior to the May 22, 2010 closing date of the EBR consultation period, the ministry considered a request from the registrant and landscape industry calling for timely access to this product based on earlier than normal seasonal weather conditions and the need for a selective herbicide to control broad leaf weeds in lawns under the cosmetic pesticides ban.
FeHEDTA has been listed as a Class 11 pesticide in Ontario. Class 11 pesticides include biopesticides and certain lower risk pesticides. Lower risk pesticides have characteristics such as low toxicity to humans, minimal impact to the environment and act in a non-toxic way in controlling intended pests.
The proposal notice was posted for the full 30 day public review and one comment was received during that period.
Comment(s) Received on the Proposal: 1
Public Consultation on the proposal for this decision was provided for 30 Days, from April 22, 2010 to May 22, 2010.
As a result of public consultation on the proposal, the Ministry received a total of 1 comments: 1 comments were received in writing and 0 were received online.
Additionally, a copy of all comments are available for public viewing by contacting the Contact person listed in this notice.
Effect(s) of Consultation on this Decision:
A comment was received related to concerns of increased loadings of heavy metals in soils from the use of this product. As part of the pesticide registration process, Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) is responsible for assessing human health, environmental impacts and product value in making a determination in registering pesticide products.
The PMRA has advised that this product was assessed in accordance with PRO2007-02, Guideline for the Registration of Low-Risk Biochemicals and Other Non-Conventional Pesticides and confirmed that the use of this product would not be a major source of iron in the environment in registering the product.
All pesticide products must be used in accordance with label directions and precautions to protect the environment.
The Ministry has considered the comment and concluded that classifying Fiesta Lawn Weed Killer (Reg. No. 29535) does not affect the proper use of this pesticide and its proposed class designation.
This product was approved for classification and placed in Class 4 based on OPAC’s recommendation.
Contact:
Wanda Michalowicz
Manager
Ministry of the Environment
Environmental Sciences and
Standards Division
Standards Development Branch
Pesticides Management
Section
40 St. Clair Avenue West
7th floor
Toronto Ontario
M4V1M2
Phone: (416) 327-5519
Fax: (416) 327-2936
Location(s) Related to this Instrument:
Province of Ontario
Additional Information:
The following government offices have additional information regarding this Decision. To arrange a viewing of these documents please call the Ministry Contact or the Office listed below.
Leave to Appeal Provisions:
No Appeal exists on the ministry's decision pertaining to this instrument.
Preview Comment
EBR Registry Number: 010-9747
Ministry: Ministry of the Environment
Notice Type: Instrument
Notice Status: Decision
Date Proposal loaded to the Registry:
April 21, 2010
Comment Period:
Public Consultation on the proposal for this decision was provided for 30 Days, from April 21, 2010 to May 21, 2010.
Comment ID 125998
Comment
Comments with respect to EBR Registry Number 010-9747 (and 010-9793), regarding a new active ingredient in PCP Registration Numbers 29535 and 29539
While I recognize that the Pest Management Regulatory Agency studies many different reviews, including those relating to environmental considerations before registering a product, I wish to raise the issue of heavy metals loading of the soil. For purposes of this comment, I will refer to the registered label instructions for PCP Reg. No. 29539, which is the DOMESTIC concentrate registration of the iron-based selective weed control. It is 4.43% Iron, present as Fe HEDTA.
The label gives the rate of 1 part concentrate per 24 parts water, mixed in solution and for tougher perennial weeds one should apply 400mL of solution to 1 M2 of turf. Therefore one litre of concentrate would yield 25 L and for 100 M2 of lawn would need 1.6 litres of concentrate mixed as 40 litres of solution. According to my math and assuming the specific gravity is roughly that of water, that would apply roughly 69g of actual iron to 100 M2 of lawn (1.6kg x 0.043%).
Doesn’t that seem very high? On one example of a chelated iron, registered by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, has the approved rate for a known iron deficiency of only 50g (of 7% iron) for 100 M2 or in other words only 50 x 0.07 or 3.5g of actual iron. This product is applying 69 grams or roughly 20 times the iron of the registered iron chelate. Since the CFIA regulates soil fertility and in part concerns itself with other maters such as loading the soil with heavy metals, I tend to put a high level of credence in their approved rates.
I urge you to consider the implications of such high levels of iron in making your determinations.
The same can be said for EBR Registry Number 010-9793.
