This has fueled a high-stakes counterattack from the multibillion-dollar pesticide
industry. Citing increased ‘‘activist threats’’ and recent pesticide bans in Canada and
the United States, a nationwide coalition of pesticide manufacturers, suppliers, and
lawn care companies recently launched a $1 million ad campaign to ‘‘educate con-
sumers’’ about pesticides, according to a press release from the group, called Project
Evergreen.
Environmentalists have responded, saying adequate testing has not been done on
the vast majority of pesticides, and that health problems for humans, birds, and fish
have been linked to lawn products.^63
Realistic Considerations
Using pesticides for the goal of a perfectly manicured lawn, that is to say, for
purely cosmetic reasons, involves unacceptable risks, exposing human life, pets, and
wildlife to unjustifiable hazards. Living in the toxic stew of today’s environment, it
may not be possible to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that lawn chemicals are at
fault, but absence of proof is not proof of absence. We must err on the side of cau-
tion. No one’s right to use lawn chemicals should take precedence over another’s right
to the highest level of health possible. If there is even a small chance that the use of
lawn pesticides will contribute to a child developing leukemia or the exacerbation of
an asthma attack, it’s a simple no-brainer: don’t use it.
Safe and effective alternatives for lawn care are available. The chemical and pesti-
cide industries may claim that we need their products, but remember that these com-
panies are in business, and their ultimate goal is profit, not health and well-being.
Simple, safe, and inexpensive lawn and garden pest remedies could seriously harm
the industry’s bottom line. The time has come for industry to read the writing on the
wall, and adjust their product lines and lawn care practices to those of a more envi-
ronmentally friendly nature. One final idea to consider is that the heavy use of pesti-
cides to create perfect lawns started only after World War II, and is an example of a
socially accepted practice that needs to be reconsidered.
Notes
- Representative Harold L. Volkmer, Democrat from Missouri, testimony before
the Committee on Science and Technology, October 8, 1989. - J. D. Spengler and K. Sexton, ‘‘Indoor Air Pollution: A Public Health Perspec-
tive,’’Science221 (4,605) (1983): 9–17. - Mary Beth Breckenridge, ‘‘Reduce Pesticide Use with Natural Alternatives,’’
Akron Beacon Journal, May 13, 2006.
4.Poison Prevention Tips(Itasca, IL: National Safety Council, n.d.). - F. Immerman and J. L. Schaum, Nonoccupational Pesticide Exposure Study
(NOPE)(Raleigh, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, January 1990): 7–12. - Ibid.
Pesticides in Homes, Lawns, and Gardens | 181