The uphill battle for communities that ban pesticides
Meg Wilcox for the Environmental Health News
On a
recent moonlit evening, with spring peepers in chorus, a dozen Wellfleet
residents gathered inside their town's grey-shingled library for a public
information session on the controversial herbicide, glyphosate.
A bucolic, seaside town
with less than 3,000 year-round residents, Wellfleet is famed for its
picturesque harbor and sweet, briny oysters.
Its residents, like the
rest of Cape Cod, rely on a sole source of drinking water, a shallow
underground aquifer, and protecting that aquifer from pollutants such as
pesticides and septic wastes from household wastewater is a huge concern.
Semi-rural, with 1,000
ponds, extensive wetlands and pristine beaches, Cape Cod is like a giant sandbar.
Anything spilled on its sandy soils can seep quickly into the groundwater and
pollute its well water and interconnected system of surface waters.
And so, as organic
landscaper and founder of the advocacy organization Protect Our Cape Cod
Aquifer (POCCA), Laura Kelley spoke about the dangers
of glyphosate, she told Wellfleet residents, "[state pesticide]
regulations don't match our ecology."
She was referring to the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources' (MDAR) allowed use of glyphosate to control weeds on rights of way under power lines on Cape Cod. Kelley, and other residents, are concerned that the weedkiller isn't as safe as regulators say it is, with emerging science suggesting harmful impacts from cancer to birth defects to disruption of hormones and other biological functions that can linger for generations.
Studies showing
glyphosate can persist in groundwater worry them, as do recent
high-profile jury awards for
people claiming their cancer was caused by the herbicide.
Herbicide use by the
region's electricity provider, Eversource, is therefore wildly unpopular on the
Cape. All 15 towns are locked in battle with both Eversource and MDAR, the
authorizing agency, over the issue.
Cape Cod isn't alone in
facing an uphill battle at carrying out local pesticide policies. While more
than 140 communities across
the U.S. have now passed a pesticide ordinance or law, and the movement has
been scoring big wins—from L.A. County's glyphosate moratorium,
to Portland, Maine's synthetic
pesticide ban, to Montgomery County, Maryland's
appellate court victory upholding its Healthy Lawns Act
to new legislation that would ban
glyphosate from New York City parks—moving from victory to
implementation of laws or ordinances can be a mixed bag.
Some localities find
that passing a law is but a battlefield victory in a prolonged war. State-level
preemption laws, resistance from implementing agencies, and lax EPA rules can
lead to policies that simply sit on a shelf or are challenged in court.
Advocates say that a
proactive organic management approach may be the best way to prevail in the
long run. A systems approach focusing on soil health is not only more effective
for turf management, but its positive message resonates with the public.
"The holistic
response motivates parents because it's their kids, and they're worried about
water contamination and drifting of pesticides," Jay Feldman, executive
director of Beyond Pesticides, told EHN. "Then they learn they can play a
part in reducing fossil fuel use and sequestering carbon [through organic
management], not to mention the insect apocalypse."
State preemption
Like most states in the
nation, Massachusetts' state law preempts localities from setting their own
pesticide policies on private property. While the land under power lines is
owned by the towns, the National Seashore or
private residences, Eversource is granted an easement which permits it to
maintain it.
Five Cape Cod towns have
banned glyphosate use on town property, but they are unable to stop
Eversource's spraying on rights of way within their boundaries.
Preemption laws prohibit
localities from adopting pesticide ordinances that are stricter than state
regulations, which tend to closely follow the EPA. Forty-three states passed
these laws, for private property, largely in response to chemical industry
pressure in the 1990s, Drew Toher, community resource and policy director at
Beyond Pesticides, told EHN.
As communities have grown concerned that the federal government isn't protecting their health, they've therefore been passing pesticide ordinances where they have authority, on public property.
As communities have grown concerned that the federal government isn't protecting their health, they've therefore been passing pesticide ordinances where they have authority, on public property.
But even those ordinances
can face resistance from opponents seeking a broad interpretation of preemption
laws, Toher said. In Maryland, which doesn't have a preemption, opponents of
Montgomery County's Healthy Lawns Act filed suit against the law, claiming
preemption was implied. Opponents lost, in a major victory for the county.
Preemption is the key
obstacle for Cape Cod but EPA's lax rules are also at play because they allow
state officials to dismiss community concerns. EPA claims that glyphosate has
no public health risk, but the International Agency for Research on Cancer
(IARC) concluded in 2015
that glyphosate is a probable carcinogen, and an international group of scientists later concurred with that finding.
The scientist group says that EPA is relying in part on data provided by industry researchers that has not been peer-reviewed.
The scientist group says that EPA is relying in part on data provided by industry researchers that has not been peer-reviewed.
MDAR has determined that
glyphosate is safe for sensitive environments, based on a review that refers
to EPA data but does not mention IARC's finding.
Eversource supervisor
for transmission management, Bill Hayes, therefore uses glyphosate, he told
EHN, because it's on MDAR's approved list.
Hayes argues that using
herbicides is "best management practices" on rights of way and that
herbicide use actually protects habitats better than mechanical means, like
mowing, which can indiscriminately destroy vegetation and lead to soil erosion.
Public health scientists
don't buy that argument. "Explore alternatives before spraying something
that's likely to cause cancer around the Cape Cod environment," Richard
Clapp, professor emeritus of environmental health, Boston University School of
Public Health, told EHN. "There are other ways to control poison
ivy."
For some communities,
repealing state preemption laws may be what's needed to give them the authority
to regulate pesticides in a way that works for their local environment. Cape
Cod's state representative Dylan Fernandes, has filed legislation that would end the state's
pesticide preemption. The bill is picking up support, with 50 to 55 sponsors,
Fernandes told EHN.
"Even a casual
observer has heard just how much the EPA has rolled back and even tried to hide
science," Fernandes told EHN. "I fundamentally believe that local residents
should have a say on what pesticides are being sprayed on the land in which
they live."
Bills to repeal
preemption have been filed in other states, including Minnesota, Connecticut
and Illinois, but none have yet succeeded. Still, Toher is buoyed that the
movement was able to beat back an attempt to slip federal preemption of
local pesticide laws into the farm bill last year.
"That fight
galvanized local legislators," he said. "I see a lot of wind at our
backs."
Montgomery County,
Maryland: Resisting agencies
Even in states without
preemption, communities can face resistance from agencies charged with
implementing local pesticide laws.
Montgomery
County—Maryland's largest county, with more than a million residents—passed in
2015 the Healthy Lawns Act, the
first U.S. county law to restrict pesticides for cosmetic use on both private
and public property.
A lawsuit was immediately filed against the private property portion of the law, but just last month Maryland's Appellate Court upheld the law, and—to advocates delight—cited Rachel Carson in the ruling's opening.
A lawsuit was immediately filed against the private property portion of the law, but just last month Maryland's Appellate Court upheld the law, and—to advocates delight—cited Rachel Carson in the ruling's opening.
Though the public
portion of the law wasn't challenged in court, the Montgomery Parks Department
has resisted implementing the law as advocates intended, Julie Taddeo, founder
of Safe Grow Montgomery, told EHN.
The law left wiggle room
for the parks department to make "certain parks" pesticide free, and
in four years, the department has done so for only 10 out of 426 parks, and
currently doesn't have plans to go beyond that, according to an email from
Montgomery Parks Deputy Director John Nissel.
The parks department is
also dragging its feet at a requirement to run a pilot pesticide-free program
on five playing fields by 2020, and its website indicates that it continues to
use herbicides for routine weed control, when pesticides should be the last
resort in an integrated pest management (IPM) approach, Taddeo said, referring
to a practice that aims to minimize risks to human health and the environment
by following a hierarchy of pest management options that moves from less
harmful (i.e., mechanical removal) to more harmful (i.e., pesticides).
County Councilor Tom Hucker
concurs with Taddeo. "They [parks department] don't seem the least bit
concerned about the public health exposure." But he thinks it will get
increasingly untenable for the parks department to continue using pesticides,
with the recent court ruling.
Nissel defended the
department's actions in an email, saying that it had met steps and dates for
implementation of the law, including designating some parks pesticide-free, and
implementing maintenance of playing fields using IPM.
Resistance from
implementing agencies is common, Chip Osborne, founder of Osborne
Organics, and a national expert on organic turf management, told
EHN. "They've been told by the pesticide industry to expect failure [with
organic management]," and some go to great lengths to defend pesticide
use. Osborne himself was a pesticide applicator for 25 years. Then in 1997, he
says he had an "aha moment" that "it's not really what it's
cracked up to be."
Long-time Massachusetts'
public health activist Ellie Goldberg agrees. "In Newton the parks
department said kids could trip on weeds and hurt their knees on the rocks if
they didn't use herbicides. They quoted pesticide manufacturer's claims that
the pesticides were safe to justify using poisons on playgrounds and playing
fields."
Even on Cape Cod, the
Falmouth Conservation Commission is resisting following
the town Board of Health's moratorium on glyphosate.
Proactive organic
management
Montgomery County's
unhurried approach to implementing the Healthy Lawns Act points to what
advocates says can be a problem with IPM. It allows pesticide use as a
"last resort," which is open to interpretation.
A proactive organic
management approach, they say, may be better for long-term success.
Banning a single
pesticide, like glyphosate, can be a smart strategy for galvanizing support,
particularly with recent high-profile jury awards.
But that strategy can fall short in the long run because a systems approach is
what's needed to fully move from conventional to organic management.
"Whether you're
managing a backyard, or national park, or a soccer field, you have to embrace
it as managing a system and the most important thing is soil health, the
biological life of the soil," Osborne told EHN. Osborne chairs Marblehead,
Massachusetts' Recreation and Parks Commission, which has practiced organic
management for nearly 20 years.
Shifting from a mindset
of feeding grass to feeding the soil builds the soil's microbial diversity, and
that helps the system withstand weed and pest pressures, Toher said. Plus, it
has "multiple beneficial bottom lines for human health, water quality and
pollinator populations."
Most important, says
Osborne, is to not just swap out a synthetic pesticide for an organic pesticide
like acetic acid. That doesn't lead to the systems change that's needed, and
organic pesticides aren't problem-free.
And, said Toher,
advocating for proactive organic management can help the environmental
community move beyond the "whack-a-mole approach" of fighting one
pesticide after another.
Communities in Maine,
such as South Portland and
Ogunquit have been adopting this approach because the state has "an
affirmative stance on the right of localities," said Toher.
Accountability and
education
Some communities, like
Marin County, California, which no longer uses synthetic pesticides on any of
its parks and playing fields, have found a formula for success that includes
public engagement, accountability and education.
Nearly 20 years ago,
Marin County, created an IPM Commission, to oversee the park
department's pesticide ordinance. The commission holds quarterly meetings, open
to the public, and produces public reports with a full accounting of its
activities.
Parks Department
director Jim Chakya told EHN the commission creates "a forum for the
community to come in and provide feedback. It's a really good place for some of
the challenging conversations around issues like glyphosate."
Sierra Club activist
Barbara Bogard agrees that the commission has been instrumental at fostering
trust with the community, but told EHN the turning point in Marin was the
election of Larry Bragman, who ran on a "no herbicides in the watershed
platform," to the water district board in 2014. That "put Marin
County elected officials on notice that this issue could turn an
election."
Marin has also put
$140,00 towards a public education campaign, and taken other steps, including a
quarter-cent sales taxes that's helped to fund the department's IPM efforts.
"This is our
water"
Back on Cape Cod, boards
of selectmen from all 15 towns have passed resolutions calling for zero
herbicide use by Eversource, and formally appealed to MDAR,
as have the region's state representatives and the Cape Cod Commission, a
regional planning agency.
The town of
Brewster—which has vernal pools, ponds, lush bird habitat and well fields in
its rights of way— has secured a preliminary injunction in Barnstable Superior
Court against Eversource.
MDAR is expected to
announce this summer whether it approves Eversource's latest plan to
spray glyphosate, as well as the pesticides imazapyr, metsulfuron methyl and
triclopyr, in rights of way in 13 Cape Cod towns (excluding Brewster due to the
court case).
MDAR declined a request for interview, but based on past decisions, it's unlikely the agency will disallow the herbicide use.
MDAR declined a request for interview, but based on past decisions, it's unlikely the agency will disallow the herbicide use.
Kelley, of Protect Our
Cape Cod Aquifer (POCCA), has been laboring, with the Association
to Preserve Cape Cod, to persuade town boards of health and
selectmen to strengthen their pesticide restriction policies.
An eleventh generation
Cape Cod resident, who grew up on a Quaker sheep farm, she's organized town
brigades to hand clear vegetation on rights of way to demonstrate that
alternative methods can work.
"This is our water.
It's up to us to protect it," she told EHN.