Coquitlam endorses pesticide bay bylaw

Published in the Coquitlam Now, February 24, 2012

Councillor O’Neill grossly distorts the precautionary principle and disingenuously ignores the huge body of scientific knowledge of cosmetic pesticides. The precautionary principle guides us to avoid chemicals that are known to be dangerous without waiting for overwhelming proof that they sicken people and pets in our own city, or in our yards. The toxicity of these chemicals is known in minute detail; as a former Environment Canada toxicologist, I have produced some of the literature myself. While modern pesticides are not as toxic or persistent as older, banned ones, they are still toxic or they would not work. Used as directed, they still kill beneficial, non-target organisms, such as earthworms. The Health Canada approvals only apply when used as prescribed, but many people use too much, or too often, or to kill plants or animals not prescribed on the labels. Pesticides can drift into a neighbour’s yard, or be tracked into the house by pets and people. Some people and pets are more sensitive than average, and can become sick even when a pesticide is used as directed. There are cheap and easy alternatives, such as a weed puller for dandelions and non-pesticide treatments for fungus on the roses or weevils on the rhododendrons. We should keep cosmetic chemicals out of our city because we don’t need them for healthy yards and gardens and because however benign they are, they still kill.