Top-12 Quotes Why the Pesticide Industry Support Pre-emption Laws
#12. Ontario represents about 40 per cent of the national market for lawn and garden pesticides.
Peter MacLeod, vice president of CropLife Canada, said banning the sale and use of the listed pesticide, herbicide and fertilizer products in Ontario would still have a huge impact on pesticide manufacturers. "Essentially, the Canadian market would no longer be viable," Mr. MacLeod said. "It won't be financially feasible anymore. It's a de-facto Canadian ban." He said Ontario represents about 40 per cent of the national market for lawn and garden pesticides.
(Source: May 02, 2008, Dundas Star News, 'Legislation won't regulate manufacture of banned pesticides' by Craig Campbell)
#11. State pesticide preemption laws key to maintaining industry control
And losing the preemption battle in California – which will more than likely be revisited in 2009 – would be alarming. As a bellwether state, failure to protect preemption will have a domino effect in other states such as New York, Wisconsin, Florida and other “hot-bed” states. Forty-one states currently have pesticide preemption laws; while 15 states have fertilizer preemption. The defense of preemption isn’t the only task at hand for the specialty pesticide industry. Regardless which party wins the White House, the industry will see and work with a much different EPA. The EPA is supporting greener products and pesticides are generally regarded as the antithesis of sustainability.
(Source: September 12, 2008, Lawn & Landscape Magazine, 'RISE Takes Bold Step', by Cindy Code, http://tinyurl.com/75shsr )
# 10. Fight these local issues before we're stuck with municipalities banning pesticides.
Karen Reardon, director of communications and public relations, told nearly 500 attendees here at the combined Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment (RISE)/CropLife America meeting that, "We're not Canada," "We must fight these local issues before we're stuck with municipalities banning pesticides the way so many cities in our northern neighbor has."
(Source: September 25, 2006, Landscape Management, 'Field Report: Grassroots efforts build momentum at RISE conference' , by Frank H. Andorka Jr. Http://tinyurl.com/gd3mp )
# 9. Can only wish that they had been better prepared.
"We can all relate to what is happening in Canada where the banning of pesticides in many communities for all users is fact, not fiction. Our counterparts there can only wish that they had been better prepared. The United States is not immune - there are many government entities in the states that are already making decisions for stringent regulations, or are doing outreach with negative or misleading information about pesticides, fertilizers and water use."
(Source: September 19, 2008, Lawn & Landscape Magazine, 'Monthly Legislative Column' , by Tom Delaney, http://www.lawnandlandscape.com/news/news.asp?ID=6728 )
# 8. The activists outworked outworked us.
“The activists plain outworked outworked us up there,” James said of mounting pesticide bans and usage restrictions in Canada. “We clearly have lost the battle in Canada for the most part. Now, it’s just a matter of how far the bans and restrictions will extend into ag markets. We cannot allow this to happen in the U.S.”
(Source: September 16, 2008, Landscape Management, It’s in da BAG, by Marty Whitford, http://tinyurl.com/7detxy )
# 7. Pesticide issue a political nightmare
Worst of times? From the industry's standpoint the regulatory contagion infecting local governments across Canada can hardly become more challenging. "Every local council in Canada has at some point looked at or has considered a pesticide bylaw," said Jennifer Lemcke, COO for Turf Holdings, Inc., Toronto. "The activists have made the pesticide issue a political nightmare for city councils and most municipal councilors just want it to go away."
"We're faced with many obstacles when trying to service our customers because each municipality has the right to restrict or ban products," she added. "There are times when we are servicing one side of the street that has one bylaw and on the other side of the street we are faced with another bylaw.
"It has been an extremely costly and frustrating process. Our company alone has devoted thousands of hours to attend council and committee meetings to help educate local government officials," she added.
(Source: Sep 1, 2006, Landscape Management, 'Lawn care — it's all grassroots by Ron Hall, http://tinyurl.com/l33wk )
# 6. Train moves much more slowly" at the state level.
The picture in the United States is more complicated. Over the past several years, the pesticide industry has successfully lobbied state legislatures to pass what are known as "pre-emption laws." These give states responsibility for pesticide regulation and prevent cities and towns from enacting their own laws. So far, 30 states have adopted pre- emption laws.
"Local communities generally do not have the expertise on issues about pesticides to make responsible decisions," said Allen James, president of Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment, a pesticide-industry lobbying group. "Decisions are made much more carefully and the train moves much more slowly" at the state level.
(Source: February 24, 2005, Detroit News, 'Lawn care industry in the
U. S. fears pesticide bans will grow. Fearing Canada's move to outlaw toxic chemicals, green businesses launch ad campaign to fight back. Http://tinyurl.com/65lxoo )
#5. Preemption laws override local pesticide bans
"We are watching the entire United States, but particularly the border states of New York, Connecticut, Maine, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Washington for any activity relative to banning pesticides, especially for outdoor lawn care and parks," James stated. "I would like to remind industry associates that fortunately for those of us in the United States, most states have state preemption laws that override local bans. However, there is a growing effort among activists to overturn state preemption, and in some cases, to secure bans in violation of state law in hopes that state legislators will change the law."
(Source: January 18, 2005, Lawn and Landscape Magazine , 'RISE President Shares Industry Outlook for 2005' http://www.lawnandlandscape.com/news/news.asp?ID=3044
#4. Pesticide bans thwarted by industry-sponsored "preemption" legislation
Ahead of their Canadian counterparts, U.S. cities won the right to pass local ordinances restricting pesticide use as far back as the 1980s, says Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, an environmental group. However, the widespread embrace of pesticide bans was subsequently thwarted by industry-sponsored "preemption" legislation, adopted in 40 states, forbidding localities to make laws more stringent than those of the state, he says.
As a result, U.S. activists have focused on banning pesticide use on land managed by public institutions such as schools, hospitals, and county governments, Feldman says. At the same time, local governments in California and New York have begun to test the strength of the preemption laws, and Canadian-style citywide pesticide bans may soon make a U.S. debut, he adds.
In response to growing challenges to preemption laws, the pesticide industry is engaging more heavily in grassroots action to help consumers speak up in favor of pesticide use, says Allen James, president of Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment, a trade association.
(Source: Jan. 18, 2006, Environmental Science & Technology (American Chemical Society) 'Canadian cities successfully by-pass industry's legal challenge to laws that keep pesticides off lawns and gardens, by Janet Pelley)
#3. Law would override any municipal by-laws
In addition, the law would override any municipal by-laws regarding cosmetic pesticide use. White welcomes the simplicity this will promote.
“The municipal bylaws were different in every city,” he says. “It was becoming impossible to operate a business and keep the regulations consistent. You could be treating one side of the street one way but because the person on the other side lived in another township, you couldn’t do anything for them. In a lot of ways this levels the playing field so when it moves forward we are dealing with one government and one rule.”
(Source: April 24, 2008, Lawn & Landscape Magazine, 'Ontario Proposes Pesticide Ban', by Heather Wood http://tinyurl.com/4vol6q )
#2. Industry has been wanting pre-emption for some time
“This is something this industry at large has been wanting the province to do for some time. It’s definitely long overdue,” said John Ladds, Operation Manager, Weed Man/Turf Management Systems. “
(Source: April 23, 2008, Simcoe.com, 'Province announces ban on use of pesticides', by Nicole Million and Julie DeBruin, http://www.simcoe.com/article/72616 )
#1. Preemption is the ultimate solution
The ultimate solution, and one the industry continues to promote, is to take control out of the hands of the municipalities and deal with the pesticide issue on a provincial level. "If we can pre-empt the municipalities from being involved, then hopefully the decisions will be based on science and not on emotion," explains DiGiovanni.
(Source: June 26, 2003, Landscape Ontario, 'Playing a role in pesticide theatre', http://tinyurl.com/94r7ej )
Pesticide Pre-emption Backgrounder
What does State/Provincial pre-emption mean for local pesticide bylaws?
Pre-emption means that local authorities are prohibited from implementing environmental or health regulations that are stricter than state or federal laws. (See Beyond Pesticides List of pre-emption laws by state). While local governments once had the ability to restrict the use, sales and distribution of pesticides, pressure from the chemical industry led many states to pass legislation prohibiting municipalities from passing local pesticide ordinances that are stricter than state policy. These laws, called state preemption laws, effectively deny local residents and decision makers their democratic right to better protection when the community decides that minimum standards set by state law are insufficient to protect local public and environmental health.
Source: What is State pre-emption? (Beyond Pesticides)
http://www.beyondpesticides.org/lawn/factsheets/Preemption%20Factsheet.pdf
Lawn-care industry pressured legislators to insert a "preemption" clause
A few years ago, the lawn-care industry pressured legislators to insert a "preemption" clause in the existing law that "effectively den [ies] local residents and decision makers their democratic right to better protection when the community decides that minimum standards set by state law are insufficient to protect local public and environmental health," according to www.protectlocalcontrol.org -- an activist website that instructs local groups how to remove such clauses once they've been inserted into legislation.
Preemption clauses gained popularity in the 1990s when tobacco companies discovered that they could operate more effectively at the state level. Since then, they've been used to win control over everything from gun control restrictions to pesticide usage.
Preemption clauses have become such a standard industry ploy, that activists have devoted a website to them, detailing everything from why industry likes them (they slow down legislation and decrease enforcement of existing laws) to describing "preemptive language" to offering help in combating them- both before and after they've been inserted.
Industry prefers that control remain with the higher levels of government because they have easier access to state legislators.
One day you're protected by a law--the next day you're not. And, because the process is not open to public scrutiny, legislators don't have to bear the responsibility for changing a law's original intent. The other disadvantage is that once such clauses are inserted, they're almost impossible to remove. A fact that Connecticut environmental activists and state Sen. Meyer say they're learning the hard way.
(Source: May 5, 2005, www.fairfieldweekly.com , 'The Health Risks of a Green Lawn' by LuAnne Roy)
Community Web.
