Crowd gathers in Cherryville to oppose Spraying

On Saturday June 30th, close to 100 people gathered in Cherryville to mark their opposition to the Ministry of Forests' plan to spray 20,000 litres of pesticides at the headwaters of the Shuswap and to tell the Province they want “Health restoration Programs” not further degradation programs.

“The Upper Shuswap River watershed includes protected areas, the interior rainforest, the Monashee Provincial Park, all of which will be affected by spraying against the Looper moth” said Carla Vierke as she welcomed people from as far as Ashton Creek to Saturday's rally. “The Ministry of Forest tells us that this spray program has been planned since 2008, showing how pesticides have become an integral part of the Province's arsenal to manage forests for the logging industry. Healthy forests that have plant diversity that provide balanced habitat for a variety of species have no need to spray” continued Vierke.

Aline Piche, who spoke on behalf of the Cherryville Water Stewards whose motto is “Protect the Source” was followed by Don Elzer who published extensively in MyValleySun.com and said that he worried about the conflicting information coming out of the Province regarding the caribou. “Who is looking after the impacts of what is happening in the forests? BC Parks tell us that spraying is necessary to protect critical cedar-hemlock habitat for Caribou while the provincial government tells us the Caribou herd's low numbers cannot be sustained, so they are allowing it to become extinct. Naturalists argue that numbers are higher than claimed and that abandoning the herd would open the area up to more logging and heli-skiing in what is sensitive Caribou range. What are we to believe?”

Of further concern to Bee SAFE is the fact that contrary to the claims made by the Ministry, Foray 48B is no inoffensive to other species and is not a solution to restoring forest health. Huguette Allen: “Working with nature is the solution, not against it. The Journal of Pesticide Reform of McGill University says that large applications of B.t (the active ingredient in Foray 48B) can have far reaching ecological impacts, dramatically reducing numbers and variety of moths and butterfly species, further impacting birds and mammals that feed on caterpillars. And Foray 48B affects mammals including humans, causing corrosive damage to eyes, skin, digestive systems, provoking cancers, allergies, asthma. We don't need the surfactants, sulphuric acid, and other contaminants used as inert ingredients in our watershed. Bee SAFE's letter to the Ministry made it clear that we're concerned that spraying is motivated by economic factors instead of ecological factors.”

As the rain started pelting down on everyone, Priscilla Judd sang a song she'd written expressly for the rally linking clearcut mountainsides, to recent mud slides, and pesticides. As people stood under umbrellas and rain coats, holding up their signs for all to see, Carla Vierke reminded everyone that this rally was only the beginning, hat although 100 people could not immediately stop the helicopters, their perseverance would win out as long as they remained determined to take back the forest.

For more info: http://www.sensociety.org/ and http://www.beesafemonashees.org/

B.C. MLAs’ recommendations Don't ban cosmetic pesticides,

CBC News Posted:May 17, 2012 10:39 AM PT

There is not enough evidence to justify a provincewide ban on the cosmetic use of pesticides but the regulations restricting their use should be tightened, according to a special committee of B.C. MLAs."The majority of the committee does not think the scientific evidence, at this time, warrants an outright ban," explained Liberal MLA Bill Bennett, who chaired the committee made up of five Liberal MLAs and three NDP MLAs. "We are not prepared to say to homeowners that purchasing 2,4-D is prohibited, under all circumstances, or that they cannot hire a qualified person to apply it to their lawns."(more)

The report by the Special Committee on Cosmetic Pesticides made 17 recommendations including:

• Restricting access to and use of commercial-class pesticides by uncertified users.
• Tightening up the rules for the sale of pesticides.
• Improving public education by using integrated pest management (IPM) specialists to develop educational resources, and creating a website to inform homeowners about IPM.
• Expanding the provincial program for safe disposal of unwanted pesticides. 

--------------
B.C. MLAs recommendation disappoint supporters of cosmetic pesticide ban (straight.com)
(excerpt) The all-party legislative committee—with a majority of Liberal MLAs—was formed in June 2011 to look into the use of pesticides and the possibility of a ban. In a report tabled today in the legislature, the committee made a series of recommendations on the sale and use of pesticides. These included calls for a ban on commercial-class pesticides for uncertified users, tougher rules around the sale of pesticides, and efforts to educate the public and encourage use of alternatives to pesticides.(more)

Diamond will be repaired

Published: March 11, 2012 1:00 AM Morning Star:
 A Coldstream park overrun by weeds is being repaired, but a long-term solution isn’t clear. The Regional District of North Okanagan will spend $3,000 to bring the ball diamond at Creekside Park up to standard after weeds left the facility in poor condition. “We will restore the diamond to a usable state,” said administrator Trafford Hall. The problem of weeds surfaced after the District of Coldstream banned the use of herbicides and pesticides in the municipality in 2009. While manual labour was used initially to control weeds, it appears those efforts didn’t continue. It’s expected resurfacing and new shale will cost about $3,000. However, it’s undetermined exactly how RDNO will ensure weed growth won’t occur again. Coldstream has demanded that RDNO use a federally approved organic pesticide or herbicide to control weeds along the base paths. But there are differences of opinion on what the term organic means as all compounds are organic in nature, but there may still be an environmental impact. “Whether it is Roundup or other federally approved chemicals, yes (we will use them),” said Hall. “If you talk to the people who approve herbicides, they will argue it is environmentally friendly.” But at least one politician isn’t sure staff actions are consistent with Coldstream’s wishes not to put  chemical substances into the environment. “We’re going to clarify the situation,” said director Doug Dirk. Director Gyula Kiss wants mechanical control of weeds, such as picking by hand, utilized. “I don’t know why it’s that difficult to maintain it without herbicides” he said. RDNO staff, though, says hoeing of the Creekside baseball diamond will cost $6,000 a week and dragging the site will be $5,809 a week.Concerns about the Creekside Park infields have come from the Vernon Baseball Association. “It presents some real challenges to our young ball players,” said president Mark Batchelor in a recent interview. “There’s significant risk for them and they don’t want to slide, there’s fear of tripping.”

E-Consultation | Special Committee on Cosmetic Pesticides

Pesticide use in British Columbia is regulated by all three levels of government – federal, provincial and municipal.  Some people believe that additional provincial regulation of the sale and use of cosmetic pesticides is necessary. 

Should the use of pesticides for cosmetic purposes be subject to additional provincial regulations? Are you in favour of province-wide restrictions on the sale or use of pesticides for non-essential purposes?  If there were additional restrictions, which business sectors or specific uses should be exempted? Should the application of cosmetic pesticides be restricted to licensed professionals? Appointed by the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, the all-party Special Committee on Cosmetic Pesticides is examining these questions and seeks your input.

You are invited to participate in the consultation by completing an on-line questionnaire or by sending a written submission to the Committee. Following the consultation, the Committee will issue a report to the Legislative Assembly recommending possible changes to provincial laws concerning the use and sale of cosmetic pesticides. The deadline for submissions is Friday, December 16, 2011.

Fewer bees buzzing in the Okanagan

CHBC News, Kelowna: Thursday, May 19, 2011 
 You may have noticed there has been less buzzing around town lately.  The long and cold winter has had a negative effect on the already declining bee population and Okanagan residents are the ones who will have to pay the price.  Bob Chisholm, a long-time beekeeper in Kelowna and member of the B.C. Honey Producers Association, lost 150 hives this year.  The hives are estimated to have been worth $45,000.

He says the bee decline means there will be less honey production this year.  It also means you may have to pay more for apples and cherries because there are fewer bees to pollinate crops.  Ed Nowek of Planet Bee Honey Farm says the decline may be the fault of the bees’ immune systems, which may not be strong enough to deal with new viruses and increased exposure to insecticides and pesticides.  To help slow down the decline of the bee population, limit the use of pesticides in your garden and try to limit their use to nighttime, which is when bees are least active.

Ban on cosmetic use of pesticides coming: Premier

Andrew MacLeod May 4, 2011 Tyee:
 A day before the B.C. New Democratic Party planned to put forward a bill to ban the cosmetic use of pesticides, Premier Christy Clark said she supports just such a ban.  "I've supported this for years now," she said in a scrum with reporters at the legislature. "We are going to do it."  Clark said she wants to engage with the NDP and the public, especially in rural B.C., to design legislation.  "The NDP are concerned about it, I'm concerned about it," she said. "I think as a new way of governing one of the things we can do is engage everyone who's interested in it, set aside all these partisan divides that pull us apart and find something that we can come together on, and I think this is that issue."  This morning the NDP announced it plans to re-introduce "legislation to ban toxic pesticides from everyday use" since the "BC Liberal government has failed to take any action to protect children from these cancer-causing substances."  "More than 70 per cent of British Columbians support the phase-out of cosmetic pesticides," the release quoted NDP leader Adrian Dix saying. "It's clear that this is another case where New Democrat values are mainstream values."  Clark said she would look at the NDP legislation and it might be a good way to start the process. She would like a bi-partisan committee to consider the issue and how to proceed, she said.

Celery, peaches coated with the most pesticides:

CTV.ca News Staff Date: Tuesday Jun. 1, 2010

Those peaches at the grocery store might look nutritious, but they might also be loaded with pesticide residues, suggests a new report from the Environmental Working Group. The non-profit environmental group, based in Washington, D.C., has updated its list of the produce items that are heaviest in pesticide residues and those that it says are "cleanest." It found that of the 12 most contaminated foods, seven are summertime fruits: peaches, strawberries, U.S.-grown blueberries, nectarines, cherries, apples and imported grapes. Many of these foods have soft skin that make them vulnerable to pests. But those are also the fruits and veggies that tend to absorb more pesticides and that are most likely to be eaten unpeeled.

This year, the worst of the worst items -- or what the EWG likes to call its list of the "Dirty Dozen" -- looks like this:

Dirty Dozen Buy these organic	Clean 15 Lowest in pesticides
1. Celery	1. Onions
2. Peaches	2. Avocados
3. Strawberries	3. Sweet corn
4. Apples	4. Pineapples
5. U.S.-grown blueberries	5. Mango
6. Nectarines	6. Sweet peas
7. Sweet bell peppers	7. Asparagus
8. Spinach, kale and collard greens	8. Kiwi fruit
9. Cherries	9. Cabbage
10. Potatoes	10. Eggplant
11. Imported grapes	11. Cantaloupe
12. Lettuce	12. Watermelon
	13. Grapefruit
	14. Sweet potatoes
	15. Sweet onions

To come up with this year's list, EWG looked through early 100,000 produce pesticide reports from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to determine what fruits and vegetables have the highest, and lowest, amounts of chemical residue. Nearly all the studies tested the produce as the foods would be eaten. So bananas were peeled before they were tested, while apples were simply washed. They found that more than 96 per cent of peaches tested positive for pesticides, followed by nectarines (95.1 per cent) and apples (93.6 per cent). Nearly 86 per cent of peaches contained two or more pesticide residues‚ followed by apples (82.3 per cent) and nectarines (80.6 per cent). Strawberries and domestic blueberries each had 13 pesticides detected on a single sample. Peaches and apples were second, with nine pesticides on one sample. On the other hand, asparagus, sweet corn, and onions had no detectable pesticide residues on 90 per cent or more of samples. And fewer than 10 per cent of pineapple, mango, and avocado samples showed detectable levels of pesticide residues. While it's not always easy to buy organic produce all the time, the EWG lists can help cash-strapped families decide which items are worth the extra cost and which are not. The EWG estimates that consumers can reduce their pesticide exposure by 80 per cent by only buying organic versions of the "Dirty Dozen".

Pesticide use notification deadline is approaching

Judie Steeves - Kelowna Capital News Published: February 26, 2010 11:00 PM

You have a little over two weeks if you want to be notified of any commercial applications of pesticides in your neighbourhood in the coming season. To be notified you must register each spring with the City of Kelowna, even if you were registered under the city’s Commercial Pesticide Notification Registry last year. The registry was brought in seven years ago, and most years 250 to 300 people register to be notified of commercial spraying on abutting residential properties. It does not cover pesticide application on agricultural properties. When registering, you must provide your name, street address, postal code, phone number, e-mail address, preference for same-day or previous-day notification and reasons for registering. Last year, the city also brought in a cosmetic pesticide ban, restricting the use of non-essential pesticides by homeowners on residential properties.

Provincially-certified pesticide applicators can apply to be exempt from the bylaw. “Certified applicants, who are properly trained on pesticide usage and healthier alternatives, can still apply chemical pesticides,” says marketing and communications coordinator Summer Bracey. “So we want to make sure residents have the option of knowing when spaying in their area is taking place. This is a valuable service for those who want to minimize their exposure to pesticides.”

Register online at Kelowna.ca/environment or call the pesticide hotline at 469-8556; or fax 862-3314; or e-mail enviro@kelowna.ca

City balks at pesticide ban

Bruce Walkinshaw - Penticton Western News February 17, 2010 1:00 PM

As the B.C. government reportedly investigates the possibility of regulating the use of cosmetic pesticides, Penticton city council has decided not to institute a ban on non-essential pesticides in the city. Instead, council voted Monday evening to maintain the status quo on the issue until the results of the provincial investigation is known. "I think the real control comes from banning it at the provincial level," said Coun. Mike Pearce before the unanimous vote. "I can't even imagine having enough bylaw officers running around out there to see if the (trouble-makers-of-the-world) are out there at 3 oclock in the morning using their 2,4-D to kill off dandelions." Last November council directed staff to investigate the possibility of implementing a ban on the non-essential use of pesticides after the issue was first raised at an agriculture advisory committee meeting when it was noted that the pesticide 2,4-D has been linked to causing severe damage to grape vines.

According to parks and facilities manager Ian Haras, the committee proposed a ban on the use of non-essential pesticides — pesticides used for strictly esthetic reasons in the maintenance of turf, flowers, ornamental plants, trees and shrubs — within Penticton, as it was noted that a ban on just 2,4-D would be unrealistic to implement. Under the proposal, essential use of pesticides, said Haras, would be defined as pesticide used to prevent economic damage or health impacts such as reducing crop damage or reducing the spread of disease. Looking at the 154 Canadian municipalities, 24 in B.C., that have prohibited or restricted the use and sale of pesticides, Haras said that staff concluded that instituting such rules would be "no small undertaking." "Using data from municipalities that have a ban in place, it can be estimated that the cost to implement a pesticide bylaw combined with an educational component appears to be in the order of $0.50 to $1 per resident per year," reported Haras.

In addition, Haras pointed out, last year's B.C. government throne speech stated that: "British Columbians will be consulted on new statutory protections to further safeguard the environment from cosmetic chemical pesticides" and in December, the Ministry of Environment started a public consultation process to address the use of cosmetic pesticides. Haras asserted that waiting to see what the province did could save staff time and budget dollars considering provincial legislation would supersede any pesticide bylaws the city would have in place. Council agreed.

No Chemicals Allowed in Coldstream Parks

Written by Peter McIntyre Thursday, 11 February 2010 16:53107.5 KISSFM:

Coldstream's mayor say his community will be a "guinea pig" for the rest of the area when it comes to natural turf care. The Greater Vernon Advisory Committee and the District's council have both passed motions banning herbicide or pesticide use on public land in Coldstream this year.Jim Garlick says it will be an interesting test and may shed some new light on the issue. "For us to be a guinea pig and actually say, 'here you go, a year without it', what does it look like? And actually get some true comparisons. We always get from staff 'oh you've got to spray three times a year' and everything else. I know some people in my neighborhood who never spray their lawn and their lawn looks fine, then I've know other people who spray constantly."GVAC is also recommending there be no herbicides used within 30 meters of playgrounds and picnic areas in Vernon, and that Round Up use on hard surfaces be cut from three to two applications a year.

Increase pesticide ban?

by Castanet Staff - Story: 52642 Feb 10, 2010 / 5:00 pm

Poll Results

Question: Should the current ban on cosmetic pesticides be increased to include professional applicators as well as homeowners? Yes 305 No 485 Total Votes: 790

Kelowna City Council wants pesticides banned throughout the province. Just how far that ban should go was a source of debate with council chambers Monday. Council, which established a pesticide bylaw that came into effect in 2009, is sending its support for proposed provincial legislation which would prohibit the sale and use of cosmetic pesticides by homeowners. The recommendations would also put restrictions on who could apply certain pesticides and how they could be sold.

However, some on council believed the recommendations don't go far enough. Councillor Charlie Hodge felt the restriction should include licensed applicators as well as homeowners. "If you want to go ahead and stop using pesticides fine. But, we are going to have to come to you and say 'if you want the same looks of your parks we will do our very best, but you'll also have to show us a significant increase to our operating budget,'" says Civic Operations Director Joe Creron. He says that increase could be as high as $700,000. "This is our opportunity to send a strong message and I think I heard staff say the alternate recommendation is better protection for our environment, it may cost a little bit more," says Councillor Michele Rule.

In a 5-3 vote, council agreed to recommend its current policy to the province, with Councillor Hodge, Rule and Angela Reid all voting against, favouring the harder line approach. "Quite personally, I don't think the recommendations are even strong enough yet, but they are a good start," says Councillor Charlie Hodge.

Kelowna asks for pesticide embargo

Ron Seymour 2010-02-09 Kelowna Courier:
The B.C. government should prevent homeowners from buying and using cosmetic pesticides across the province, Kelowna city council says. Councillors voted unanimously on Monday to suggest Victoria introduce a new law preventing retailers from selling products such as Weed‘N‘Feed and other pesticides designed for lawn and garden use. “This legislation should be done on a provincial level,” Coun. Luke Stack said after council heard about one-third of British Columbians live in municipalities where use of cosmetic pesticides is restricted. The B.C. government has set a Feb. 15 deadline for comment on possible changes to provincial laws regarding the sale and use of cosmetic pesticides. Six provinces already restrict or prohibit the use of the products, citing concerns about their potential impact on the environment and human health. Kelowna‘s bylaw, which took effect last year, prohibits homeowners from using cosmetic pesticides on their property, but allows licensed commercial applicators to continue spraying the products. Council heard from staff that the bylaw has been generally well-received by the public, with few complaints and many people saying they had, or intended to, eliminate or reduce the use of cosmetic pesticides. A minority of councillors – Angela Reid, Charlie Hodge and Michele Rule – wanted the city‘s submission to the province to include a recommendation that a ban on the use of cosmetic pesticides apply to everyone, including those currently licensed to spray them. Such a band, Reid said, would be good for the “health and well-being of human beings, and our furry friends,” and Rule said she didn‘t believe that any pesticide use was safe. But Hobson cautioned against being “overly simplistic” on the issue, noting there are many kinds of pesticides. Critics of pesticide-control bylaws say there‘s no scientific evidence the products are harmful, and point out their manufacture is regulated by the federal government.

Pesticide ban no problem for most residents, says report

Ron Seymour 2010-02-06 Kelowna Daily Courier:
Kelowna homeowners have embraced a new bylaw that restricts the use of pesticides on lawns, city council will hear on Monday. Nearly 80 per cent of residents are aware of the bylaw, and more than two-thirds of those say they‘ve eliminated or reduced their pesticide use, according to staff who conducted a telephone survey last fall. “With continued public education, the numbers of pesticide users should be further reduced,” reads part of a report to council by staffer Todd Cashin. “Residents are looking to understand what alternatives are available and how pesticides may negatively impact the environment.” Kelowna‘s bylaw, which came into effect last year, prevents homeowners from using products such as Weed ‘N Feed on their lawns. While there were said to be hundreds of calls to the city about the bylaw, only five complaints were made by people about their neighbours supposedly using pesticides. “All complaints were followed up by city staff, information was provided and an educational package was sent to residents,” Cashin writes, although his report does not indicate whether anyone suspected of using pesticides was fined. One homeowner asked for an exemption to use pesticides, but this request was denied.

Dozens of Canadian cities have passed similar pesticide bans, citing concerns about the possible environmental and health impact of the products. Six provincial governments have passed laws restricting the sale of pesticides, and B.C. is considering following suit. Critics, whose ranks include the owners of lawn-and-garden-care companies, say there‘s no scientific evidence that the pesticides are harmful, and note the products have all been approved for sale and use by the federal government.

At a meeting in Kelowna last week of owners of lawn-and-garden-care companies, there were calls for Ottawa to stand up to the “bullies” in the environmental movement who have lobbied for pesticide bans in the absence of studies that show the products are harmful. Kelowna‘s bylaw allows licensed commercial applicators to continue using pesticide products. However, one “alternate recommendation” to be presented on Monday would also ban them from using pesticides in favour of products said to be more friendly to the environment.

Pesticide ban may face legal challenge

Judie Steeves - Kelowna Capital News Published: January 28, 2010 6:00 PM

Environmental activists will have to answer in a court of law, where conjecture and hearsay are not admissible, says Jeffrey Lowes, who Tuesday filed 115 charges against 23 individuals, groups and the province of Ontario, for its ban on the use of cosmetic pesticides. He claims that the province’s legislation, enacted last year, is based on fraudulent information as far as the health and environmental risks associated with the use of chemicals to maintain lawns and landscapes, is concerned. Lowes is guest speaker at the Integrated Environmental Plant Management Association’s 14th annual conference being held in Kelowna this week.

Kelowna enacted a similar bylaw last year, and Lowes said he will be investigating the basis of that legislation as well. The crux of it is whether there is an issue or whether there is just the perception of an issue, he explained. If legislation is enacted based on extensive testing, field trials, toxicology and epidemiology, that’s one thing, but if it’s based on medical reports supplied by environmental activists—or on a public opinion poll—that’s another, he said. “We’re not questioning the authority of a municipality to enact a bylaw, but they need justification,” he said. Todd Cashin and Michelle Kam from the City of Kelowna said the city’s bylaw was the result of a grassroots movement’s concerns about pesticide use. Kam pointed out it only affects non-essential pesticides; those used for esthetic purposes. “We have no concerns,” commented Cashin. He said the city hasn’t had to enforce the city’s new bylaw yet.

Lloyd Manchester of Canadian EarthCare in Kelowna, which was active in promoting the bylaw, said, “The case on pesticides is well known and the province has the right to ban any pesticide it so desires. “His (Lowes’) actions do not concern me and are likely funded by the pro-pesticide industry.” Lowes also plans a submission to the province of B.C., which is proposing a similar ban on pesticides used for cosmetic purposes. It concludes its public consultation period Feb. 15 on the proposed new legislation.

“The lawn care industry is being told to lower their standards; to use less effective products to do their job,” Lowes said. “And, the industry is losing customers,” he said, while turf is becoming infested with weeds and insects. By banning useful products for use by the lawn care industry, its members are prevented from properly maintaining sports fields, parks, rights-of-ways, and other landscapes, he said. It has cost the industry 30 per cent of its business, or $350 million in Ontario, he claims. “We’re assessing the monetary damage done to the industry now and will sue to recover,” he commented. Lowes admits he has no background as a pesticide applicator or a scientist, and says there’s nothing personal about this campaign against such bans on pesticide use. He said he is not representing chemical companies. He was asked to help out a group of lawn care companies in Kingston, Ontario and it grew from there. Although he filed the charges personally, there is a Feb. 17 hearing with the Crown prosecutor and a judge to set a date for a pre-enquete hearing on the charges.

That will result in a decision on whether the Crown will proceed with the charges under the Criminal Code of Canada. Allegations include that false and misleading information regarding the health and environmental risks of pesticide products regulated by the federal government influenced the decision to ban pesticides for cosmetic use in Ontario. As well, activists pretended to use “peer-reviewed studies” and endorsements by the Canadian Pediatric Society to defraud the lawn care industry of access to products; and impeded access to Health Canada-approved pesticides by fraud, which directly affected the Ontario lawn industry’s $1.3 billion market, he alleges. The Canadian Cancer Society, B.C. and Yukon, is a proponent of B.C. legislation to ban the cosmetic use of pesticides, and is lobbying to have people participate in the online consultation process at www.env.gov.bc.ca/epd/ipmp/regs/cosmetic-pesticides/consultation.htm

Ban on residental pesticide use scrapped

Richard Rolke - Vernon Morning Star Published: January 26, 2010 7:00 PM

Vernon residents will still be able to use pesticides to control weeds on their own property. On Monday, city council agreed to reduce cosmetic pesticide applications on its own land, but a proposed residential ban in 2012 was scrapped. “It’s private property we were talking about there and we couldn’t enforce it,” said Coun. Mary-Jo O’Keefe, who made the motion not to prohibit use in residential yards. Similar views also came from the rest of O’Keefe’s colleagues. “How do you make people do this — hire the bylaw police?” said Coun. Jack Gilroy. Mayor Wayne Lippert insisted that having a bylaw that isn’t enforced would undermine the city’s credibility. “There are too many loopholes for people to get through it,” he said.

Council also decided to avoid a residential ban now because the provincial government is currently reviewing legislation on cosmetic pesticides. “By then we’ll have a direction from the province and it will be easier for us to do,” said O’Keefe of enforcement. As part of council’s decision, city staff has been instructed to develop a program that educates the public about cosmetic pesticide use. Coun. Buffy Baumbrough, chair of the environmental advisory committee and a cosmetic pesticide bylaw advocate, was absent Monday.

Park Plan Costly / Pesky Pesticide Plan Postponed

Peter McIntyre Tuesday, 26 January 2010 06:47 107.5 KISSFM

One city councillor says 2.5 million dollars is too much to pay for a downtown park. Bob Spiers says that could be the final bill for developing the former Vernon Medical Clinic site on 31st Ave into a walkway connecting the civic complex and Cenotaph Park. He says it dosen't make sense to him, and he will not support that kind of expenditure for a park. Spiers says he always thought parks should be financed through NORD and GVSC. Mayor Wayne Lippert says the site could also include other uses like retail and residential, adding its premature to say it will just be a park.

Peter McIntyre Tuesday, 26 January 2010 06:43107.5 KISSFM

Vernon will work towards less pesticide use on city owned land starting this year, but the plan to add residential properties in 2012 has been put on the shelf. Councillor Mary Jo O'Keefe says a bylaw to restrict the cosmetic use on private land would be almost impossible to enforce. She says it'd also encourage tattle tale neighbours which she says is a really poor way to have city bylaws, particularly as they're hard to enforce. The city will wait to see what the province does with a restriction on pesticides before expanding to private land. In the meantime, staff will develop a program to educate residents about use of the chemicals.
----------------

Don Quixote Note: At the resumption of the Budget Debate held after the regular meeting was completed the Council by a 5-1 vote (Coun. Baumbrough was absent for both of the above votes due to illness) to approve $199,500 towards detailed design work and construction for the first phase of the redevelopment of the Vernon Medical Clinic site in 2010. There is an estimate that completion of the actual project will cost an additional $400,000.

As a 1% tax increase is equivalent to $242,063 this $199,500 expenditure this year represents .82% of the tax burden for the residential and business taxpayers. At the conclusion of the budget sessions at 7 PM last night the tax increase was approaching 2.10%.

Actual Concept Plan and Costing details available on P.124-126 Agenda Package

Finally, a suspect in bee decline

Mites in carcasses cited by University of Guelph entomologist Published On Sun Jan 24 2010 STAR.Com

Especially if it's about Colony Collapse Disorder, the mysterious vanishing act that's decimated almost 30 per cent of the northern hemisphere's honey producers and pollinators since late 2006. In the past two years alone, hundreds of books have been published on the plight of domestic honeybees. And if, as the saying goes, the sunny little insects are responsible for one forkful of every three bites of food you eat, that doesn't bode well for the myriad crops in Canada that rely on them for pollination. Despite this, Ernesto Guzman, an entomological researcher at the University of Guelph, is skeptical that CCD actually exists.

"CCD is an arbitrary name," he says, "designed by U.S. scientists to define a high mortality of colonies that have no explainable reason. "Radio waves, even terrorist plots" are among some of the theories. Bees across Canada have declined by 30 to 40 per cent every spring since 2006. After a busy fall of stashing nectar and pollen for the cold months to come, bee colonies get swathed in thick, black wrap for winter hibernation, only to be found dead in the first melting weeks of February and March. "If you're a dairy farmer," says Tim Greer, president of the Ontario Beekeepers Association, "imagine losing between 30 to 40 per cent of your dairy cows each year. That's a significant loss." Guzman acknowledges that we have a problem. But the Mexico-born bee expert suggests scientists are stuck in nomenclature.

Canadian officials, meanwhile, insist our bees aren't suffering from CCD for one main reason: they aren't disappearing. "The main symptom among CCD cases described in the States is that they don't find corpses," says Guzman. "It's like they have died in the field and they never came back. "We don't see that in Canada, I believe, because in the winter they cannot fly out." A good thing for us, says Guzman, because corpses can be studied, and since the fall of 2007 he has been doing just that. He followed 413 Ontario bee colonies for a year and recorded their fates, studying up-close the 27 per cent of hives that didn't survive winter. In a report to be published in the journal Apidologie, Guzman identifies what killed them: the varroa mite, a crab-like parasite the size of a pen dot. Abetted by poor bee populations and low food reserves for the winter, Guzman says, the bee bloodsucker is without question why colonies in Ontario, at least, are dwindling so fast.

Ed Nowek of Planet Bee apiaries in Vernon, B.C., ventures the same conclusion for his side of the country. "I've never seen it so hard to keep bees alive than in the past four to five years," he says of his 30-year run in the business." Though the mite isn't new, beekeepers say what's most disconcerting is the probable cause behind its sudden explosion: a built-up resistance to the chemicals used to kill them. For the same reasons some hospital patients succumb to antibiotic-resistant bacteria such as MRSA, varroa has become the superbug of Canada's bees. And though Apivar, a miticide used in New Zealand and Europe, seems to do the trick on Varroa, it's strictly regulated by Health Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency. Perhaps rightly so: there's no telling how long it will be effective for.

But, as Greer says, "there's nothing else we can do. Other than wait another winter and see what the results are." Last November, as temperatures dipped in Ontario, the bees began to cluster. He sprayed them with the Apivar, fed them a little extra sugar syrup and tucked them in for the winter, hoping that by spring they'll be buzzing when he comes to unwrap them.

Current Emergency Registrations for British Columbia

Crop	Pest	Registrant	Product Name & PCP#	Active Ingredient	Dates of Registration

Beehives

Varroa mites

Veto-Pharma

Apivar PCP #29092 (PDF)

amitraz

July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010

Pesticide bylaw drives debate

Richard Rolke - Vernon Morning Star Published: January 12, 2010 7:00 PM

Plans to restrict chemical applications on nuisance weeds are having a difficult time taking root. Vernon council refused to endorse a cosmetic pesticide control bylaw Monday, and instead sent it back to staff so more information can be compiled. “When I have to tell my neighbour he can’t spray on his own property, I have a problem with that,” said Coun. Jack Gilroy. “There are people taking care of their yards and they’re immaculate and I can’t see telling them they will have to have dandelions.” Under the draft bylaw, pesticides would be reduced for public lands either owned by the city or contracted by the city to maintain within Vernon. It also calls for the residential component of the bylaw to be enacted in 2012. “How can we enforce it on private land?” said Mayor Wayne Lippert. Staff indicated there’s no proof that broad-leafed weeds have created safety risks on sports fields, but Coun. Shawn Lee disagreed. “I’ve seen a soccer career end on a plantain (weed) at Marshall Field,” he said. There were also concerns that switching from chemicals to integrated pest management could be expensive. As an example, weed control at Lakeview Park now costs about $50 a year, but that could soar to $9,000. “It’s a big amount,” Lippert said of the price tag that could face taxpayers with parks.

However, the bylaw also has its supporters. “If you are taking care of your lawn with watering, aeration and fertilizing, you can dramatically reduce your weed issue,” said Coun. Buffy Baumbrough, who questions the need for chemicals to control cosmetic weeds. While he has concerns about the potential costs, Coun. Patrick Nicol believes the bylaw is a positive move. “A lot of people wanted this for the health reasons and a number of jurisdictions have gone this route,” he said. In her report to council, environmental planner Brooke Marshall stated the draft bylaw is based on regulations in other jurisdictions. “Twenty-two communities in B.C. have cosmetic pesticide bylaws,” she said.

---------------

A balancing act Richard Rolke - Vernon Morning Star Published: January 12, 2010 7:00 PM

Perhaps it’s because of my time spent on an orchard, but I am neither afraid of pesticides or entirely crazy about them. I fully understand that when applied incorrectly they pose a risk to human health as well as the environment. But when the rules are followed, they can be an appropriate way to address some difficult situations. Generally I ignore weeds in my yard because it can be an endless fight and because my family and pets don’t need to be exposed regularly to chemicals. But I also have a jug of Round-Up for the more challenging plants, such as thistle, which is prickly on the toes, and the broad-leafed plantain, which is a tripping hazard. I believe I have found a balance in my yard and that is why I have concern about the bans on cosmetic pesticides being considered in Vernon and Coldstream.

First off, how is banning pesticides on private property enforceable? Are municipalities going to hire dozens of staff to drive up and down streets in the hopes of finding someone nuking a dandelion, or is Big Brother simply going to encourage residents to snitch on their neighbours? There should also be a concern that if the purchase and use of commercial pesticides becomes frowned on, that some residents will whip up their own home remedies, using some nasty stuff. How is this good for human health or the environment? In defending a draft bylaw Monday, Vernon Coun. Buffy Baumbrough stated that, “If you are taking care of your lawn with watering, aeration and fertilizing, you can dramatically reduce your weed issue.” Such an approach may be true, but for any of us on the former Vernon Irrigation District, strict restrictions were in place for much of the year and that meant opportunities to water dropped to a trickle. And given where water rates have gone in the last few years, just letting the taps run so the grass can turn green is extravagant. Large chunks of my yard don’t get water unless it rains and that means the grass turns a nice shade of brown in the summer and the weeds conquer more territory. Beyond private property, these proposed bylaws would apply to public lands such as sports fields and parks.

Once again, chemical applications should be limited, particularly where children congregate, because of the potential hazards. But ignoring weeds can also create health problems, whether it is tripping over those broad-leafed plants or a patch of dandelions attracting bees, which could sting a child that is allergic to them. They stop being cosmetic when someone gets hurt. It should also be pointed out that not only have commercial pesticides gone through considerable testing by government agencies, but the commercial companies that apply them have gone through training and licensing. Obviously improvements can always be made to the regulatory process, but anyone spraying weeds in a local park lives here and they probably want to ensure the health of both themselves and their family. Those pushing for a ban on pesticides always cite integrated pest management as the answer, but it could see weed control at Lakeview Park skyrocket from $50 to $9,000 a year. When all parks are factored in, that could hit taxpayers hard, particularly when many of them have lost their jobs and wages have been frozen.

Ultimately I have no problem with pursuing alternatives to weed control, but the reality is that even once they’ve been used, a squirt of Round-Up may still be required to get weeds under control.But the real focus should be on educating people to make decisions that are right for them and the specific weed situation facing them, and not just an arbitrary ban that will serve no one

Pesticide Policy Put On Hold

Peter McIntyre Tuesday, 12 January 2010 10:52 107.5 KISSFM:

Vernon council members need more time to think about a proposed bylaw limiting cosmetic pesticide use. After a long discussion at Monday's meeting, council tabled the issue for two weeks to get more information. The policy would be phased-in for parks and other public land this year, with private land to start in 2012. Councillor Jack Gilroy has a problem with telling residents what they can --- or can't do --- with their yards. "When it comes to my neighbor or myself wanting to take care of their yards, I don't know why government has to get involved with an everyday thing I've been doing my entire life." Other council members, including Patrick Nicol, have concerns about the costs of natural weed control which could be several hundred thousand dollars more than using pesticides. Nicol says, "For example, Lakeview Park, (the city currently spends) $50 ( on weed control) and it seems to be working pretty good, versus $9,100, so that's a challenging issue. Anyone who thinks that's a simple issue is wrong."

Cosmetic pesticides are defined in a city report as "those substances which are intended to control weeds which do not pose any physical threat to health or infrastructure, but which are to be removed for aesthetic purposes only. Cosmetic pesticides are not those used for agricultural purposes, for infrastructure maintenance, to protect homes, for the elimination of noxious and invasive weeds, or to ensure the health of the community."

Public input sought on use of pesticides

Richard Rolke - Vernon Morning Star Published: December 31, 2009 6:00 PM

The debate over lawn care chemicals is going provincial. The Ministry of Environment is asking British Columbians for input on whether additional rules are required for pesticides for cosmetic purposes. “It speaks to the level of interest of the public on this topic,” said Buffy Baumbrough, a Vernon councillor who sits on the environmental advisory committee. “It’s a good opportunity for them to put forward their views.” The provincial process comes at a time when the city is considering banning the cosmetic use of pesticides on public and private lands. “Given the number of e-mails I have received, I believe there is public support,” said Baumbrough, adding that staff is currently reviewing the viability of a ban. “But we also have to be realistic and make sure it’s operationally do-able.”

Dave Weatherill, Briteland owner, believes there could be benefits to the provincial process. “I hope people are educated as to alternatives based on knowledge instead of just having bans,” he said. “If there is a ban in place, bugs and weeds don’t acknowledge political decrees and they get worse.” Weatherill believes there isn’t enough information about the training lawn care companies or businesses like his must follow. “They’ve gone through the gauntlet to be registered,” he said. “Everyone is looking to live in a safe community. If use a product that’s been tested, there are rules to follow.” Weatherill also fears an outright ban on pesticides could force some people to make their own remedies and that could put the environment and people at risk. “They could be using a product that is far more hazardous.”

The consultation process will continue until Feb. 15, and the results will be made public in the spring. “It just makes sense to limit pesticide use to what is actually required to accomplish a particular task, which is why we already require the use of integrated pest management for many pesticide uses in B.C.,” said Environment Minister Barry Penner. “We now want to have a discussion about how we can encourage all British Columbians to reduce unnecessary pesticide use.”