THAT Report RPM 3/01, outlining turf management strategies with the objective of reducing pesticide use over time, be received and filed.

Council, at the meeting held on February 8, 1999 approved Report TEAMS 5/99 (AF-29-99). The report recommended increased level of maintenance for passive parks, boulevards, beds, and hard surfaces for weed control. The report recommended consideration for increased funding during the preparation of the 1999 Current Budget. A decision unit was included in the 1999 Current Budget and was approved by Council in the amount of $229,500 for the increased level of maintenance, which included the use of pesticides.

Council, at the meeting held on April 17, 2000, approved the following revised recommendations of Report RPM 5/00 (CS-71-00) which detailed the long range strategy for managing City of Burlington turf:

THAT the use of pesticides on turf, other than on playing fields and emergency / hazardous situations, be suspended; and

THAT all other aspects of the Roads and Parks Maintenance Department’s 2000 Turf Management Program as proposed in the Roads and Parks Maintenance Department Report RPM 5/00, dated April 3, 2000, be approved; and

THAT the Director of Roads and Parks Maintenance be directed to work with the Sustainable Development Committee, the City’s Environmental Coordinator, and the Environmental Management Team, and report back to the Community Services Committee with a more aggressive approach to the elimination of pesticides in the City’s Turf Management Plan, similar to the successful program being used by the City of Waterloo; and further that the Sustainable Development Committee be encouraged to receive input from citizens on both sides of this issue; and

THAT the City of Burlington request that the Halton Medical Officer of Health provide an updated position on the use of pesticides and an opinion on Roads and Parks Maintenance Department Report RPM 5/00, dated April 3, 2000 and on staff’s subsequent report on this matter; and

THAT the Director of Roads and Parks Maintenance be directed to research the City of Waterloo and other organic weed control associations and report back to the Community Services Committee on the success with their alternative weed control program(s); and

THAT the Director of Roads and Parks Maintenance be directed to develop a public communications program to encourage reduction of pesticide use on private property, as part of a community outreach program within the context of the City’s environmental management plan.

The following report addresses the above recommendations and provides an update of the recent developments and changes to the Turf Management Program to meet these objectives.

1. Pesticides

Throughout the development of the City’s Turf Management Program it has been quite clear that the overwhelming concern has been with the use of pesticides. The term "Pesticide" is generic and describes a product designed to stop or limit pest occurrence. "Insecticides" kill insects, "Herbicides" kill weeds, "Fungicides" suppress or kill fungi. All of these products are "Pesticides".

The products themselves are regulated by the federal government through Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA). The federal legislative authority for the regulation of pesticides in Canada is the Pest Control Products Act. The use of the products is regulated by the provincial/territorial governments through the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) in Ontario. The provincial legislative authority for the regulation of the use of pesticides is the Pesticides Act.

Some of the recent media attention involving pesticides at the municipal level focus around the issue of municipal empowerment. The two high profile cases are Hudson, Quebec and Halifax, Nova Scotia. Presently Ontario municipalities do not have the authority to regulate use on private lands; they have the authority over their own properties, as do any landowners. In the case of Hudson, the Quebec government changed their legislation to empower their municipalities. A similar phenomenon occurred in Nova Scotia; however, the change was specific in allowing empowerment only to Halifax, who responded by passing a 4-year phase out by-law. The Hudson case has been challenged and a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada should be rendered this summer. This decision, as to whether the municipality has the legal right to regulate the use of these products on private lands, could spark significant changes in the regulation of these products across the country.

The science surrounding these products is not all encompassing which tends to cause a great deal of controversy. There are many public health concerns which may (or may not) be linked to these chemicals. Information is plentiful with very strong arguments from both sides. This is a very difficult and passionate issue that is still under debate at all levels of government.

The discussion centres on Risk Management, what is an acceptable level of risk? This is defined by the individual affected. For example, some are adamant that no insecticides be used to treat sport fields where their children play, yet they will apply a pharmaceutical product (insecticides at a much higher concentrations) to their child’s hair to treat head lice. Contradictions and inconsistencies such as this are plentiful and it comes down to what is an acceptable level of risk that one should take given their circumstance.

There are times when the use of pesticides may be an appropriate solution for treating a situation where human health concerns could be greater if chemicals were not used. The possibility always exists for a future epidemic (such as recent concerns with the West Nile Virus) or insect/plant infestation capable of devastating whole sport fields, parks, trees, and private property. Would it be prudent to treat the immediate area with a chemical product or would we be exposing the general population to undue risk and harm? Many questions can be asked with many differing answers.

Given the uncertainty associated with health concerns related to these products, it is prudent to adopt the precautionary principle of "erring on the side of caution" and proceed with maintaining the City’s green space with little or no pesticides. As such, staff developed a responsible Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Program to maintain healthy turf and rejuvenate deteriorated turf through cultural practices. Stronger healthy turf can resist weed infestation, disease, and pests on its own merit. Through proper maintenance techniques and a good monitoring program, pesticide usage has been reduced to a minimum and will only be used to treat specific problems at specific locations. Examples of this are the use of a herbicide to treat a patch of Poison Ivy where other means of eradication are not possible, and insecticide treatment of grubs or cinch bugs in a section of a sport field. The program achieves the desired goal of pesticide reduction and is in accordance with the recommendations set forth by the Medical Officer of Health.

 

2. Turf Management Program

A number of initiatives have taken place following the meeting of Council held on April 17, 2000. The following sections will provide information regarding these initiatives and detail the proposed City-wide Turf Management Program. Appendix "A" summarizses the planned 2001 program.

Much reference to the City of Waterloo has been made during the evolution of the City of Burlington’s Turf Management Program. The City of Waterloo is considered a forerunner in the implementation of a successful Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Program. The term IPM is not new and has been developed since the 1960’s. Many municipalities and private companies use IPM, or offer it as an alternative to traditional spraying and fertilizing programs. The critical fact to remember is there is not one standard IPM program that can be used across the board and achieve the desired effect. IPM programs must be customized to each geographical area to address climactic and vegetative differences.

In 1990 Waterloo developed a "Plant Health Care Program" (PHCP) which was approved by their Council. The PHCP is very similar to the Turf Management Program proposed for the City of Burlington. Both stress the ultimate goal for progressive reduction and eventual elimination of pesticide use. The City of Waterloo has never passed a by-law to restrict chemical use but rather has relied on public education to promote and encourage private landowners to reduce pesticide use (a similar approach as the "Blue Box" recycling program).

City of Burlington staff visited the City of Waterloo on two occasions in the summer and fall of 2000. The visits proved to be very informative. It should be noted from the onset that the City of Burlington Turf Management Program and the City of Waterloo’s PHCP are very similar. Both programs use the same cultural practices at similar frequencies to obtain healthy turf with limited use of pesticides. As such, only the differences between the two programs will be addressed in this section.

• Naturalization

The most significant difference in the two programs is the Naturalization component. The City of Waterloo has been naturalizing green space since the inception of their program. Their strategy was simple and key to their success. They allowed previously maintained green space to gradually revert to its natural state. They let the outlying perimeter areas of their parks to grow and eventually let these newly created natural areas move inward towards the active areas of the park. By doing this they managed to reduce the maintenance demands within each park and allowed staff to change their focus to the areas that really needed attention, the sport fields and active use areas.

There was concern from surrounding property owners abutting the newly created natural areas, some of these included aesthetics, rodents, weed infiltration, etc. To address this, Waterloo staff created buffer areas along the perimeters by cutting one metre (mower width) strips. The only drawback to the naturalization program is the loss of maintained picnic or permitted area that the City manages. However, through their public information programs they have promoted naturalization throughout the City and have established new developments around the naturalization principle.

Part of their naturalization strategy includes an abundance of signage indicating a wide range of expectations. Signs are used to indicate a full range of management activities, such as overseeded areas, renovation activities, poison ivy signs to ensure use at own risk, etc. They use signs to inform the public of what is occurring in specific areas of the park.

• Community Acceptance

The reason Waterloo has been successful with their pesticide reduction program and naturalization strategy is the acceptance or buy-in from the community at large and the support they have received form their own management and Council. The community has adopted their principles of naturalization and accepted a standard for turf in Waterloo that permits a variety of plant species to exist in their maintained turf areas. This is a very key point to the success of their program, as they have developed a standard that they believe is an acceptable level of service for their community and they have support to apply it. Waterloo has managed to move away from a grass monoculture and has adopted the principle that other vegetation, including plants usually defined as weeds, are a viable and acceptable ground cover.

• Sport Fields

The City of Waterloo has a similar (to Burlington) service level for their sport fields.

Some notable differences include;

1. Increased grass cutting height on sport fields;

Waterloo has managed to gradually increase their cutting heights in sport fields over time. By implementing the increase on a gradual basis they were able to set a cutting height that is similar to the passive park areas without repercussion from the user groups.

2. Additional control with permits and scheduling of fields;

Waterloo maintains very strict schedules for their sport fields. This has great benefits, as they are able to close fields for planned maintenance activities and divert the users to other fields during these periods.

3. Fencing in of sport fields;

Similarly to the above, fencing in the more prominent fields provides far more control of usage. One of the biggest problems associated with maintaining the turf on these fields is the usage. By ensuring that people are off the fields following certain maintenance procedures you ensure the field has adequate time to regenerate.

4. Acceptance of weeds in the turf;

As mentioned previously, the community has come to accept the fact that weeds are also a viable ground cover and have accepted their presence in sport fields.

• Boulevards

The main difference is the concept of "what is an acceptable ground cover". Waterloo has adopted the principle that weeds are a viable ground cover; in Burlington the general populous still has a preference for grass. As such, Burlington staff make a concerted effort in maintaining turf grass in boulevards. Whereas Waterloo uses cutting as their cultural practice in boulevards, Burlington also performs topsoil and overseed operations, aeration, and hydroseeding to encourage healthy turf to prevent weed infiltration. In essence, the City of Burlington has a higher service level in boulevards than Waterloo.

2.2    The City of Burlington – Green Space

As mentioned previously, the City of Burlington has adopted the principle of creating a healthy green space with limited or no pesticide use. Through the development and implementation of the Turf Management Program, it is staff’s intention to create a healthy green space with minimal or no use of chemicals. However, it is recognized that there may be isolated cases where there is no other viable alternative but to use some form of chemical treatment to eradicate specific problems. The following represents the bulk of the City’s Turf Management Program which emphasizes cultural methods to proactively promote healthy turf rather than the use of chemicals to reactively remedy isolated problem occurrences.

• Monitoring

One of the key components of a successful program is the monitoring process. It is easy to apply a generic solution to a problem on a broad scale. For instance to treat dandelions in scattered areas of the City, it would be simple to apply herbicide to all turf areas of the City. However, this would not be a cost effective nor environmentally appealing solution. As such, through the 2001 Current Budget process, a new position was approved specializing in the practice of horticulture management. Staff are extremely excited about this initiative as this person will be able to monitor all turf and ornamental bed areas, assess and report on conditions, initiate remedies, and investigate and implement new methods or alternate solutions on a site by site basis. A very site specific detailed program which promotes healthier green spaces will be developed in order to sustain our "green assets".

• Pesticide Application

Staff have made great progress in 2000 in reducing the amount of herbicide applied to turf. Staff are confident that in 2001 pesticides will only be required for site specific problems, such as the treatment of a patch of Poison Ivy. However, despite the near elimination of pesticide use, staff are not of the opinion that a by-law or outright ban of these products is warranted at this time. All IPM Programs have a component of minimal pesticide use and staff require the flexibility to utilize products, if necessary, to treat specific isolated problems that cannot be rectified through other means.

The greatest concern with the program today is the use of pesticides. Staff, through the addition of the new horticulture position, will be able to readily determine if a product needs to be applied, keeping usage to an absolute minimum. Should an application of a pesticide be required, it would be done in a fashion as to minimize exposure. Granular applications would be used on areas such as sport fields following or prior to the sport season; liquid applications would be used to treat isolated incidents of Poison Ivy, etc. Once again, these treatment would only be applied if required and on a small isolated scale. At present, staff do not anticipate using these products in 2001 other than for emergency isolated situations.

• Aquacide

This term is used to describe the use of hot water to eradicate undesirable vegetation and provides an alternative to pesticides. This environmentally friendly method of weed control has been used to replace pesticides on all hard surface areas (traffic islands, shrub beds, baseball warning tracks, etc.) in Burlington.

• Mowing Height

The process of allowing the grass to grow to a thick ground cover and remove only 1/3 of the grass blade with a sharp mower at a time promotes healthy root systems and makes the turf less susceptible to weed seed and insect infestation.

Active Irrigated Fields 44 cuts/year (2.5" height)

Active Fields and Active Parks 22 cuts/year (3" height)

Passive Parks and Boulevards 14 cuts/year (3" height)

Bikeways 4 cuts/year (3" height)

Roadside 2 cuts/year (3" height)

Given the success of Waterloo with gradually increasing the cutting heights on sport fields to 3", staff will be holding future discussions with the user groups to address this possibility.

• Aeration

This a coring operation that reduces soil compaction, controls thatch, reduces disease incidence, and provides for better penetration of water and fertilizer, as well as improved seed germination. The plugs or soil cores left on top return top dressing and nutrients to the soil. Active and passive parks and sport fields are undertaken at regularly scheduled intervals, as are some boulevard locations. Not all boulevards presently receive this practice due to their limited size, as well as concerns with buried utilities such as cable lines. Staff are researching equipment to apply this operation to tighter boulevard areas and will likely expand this practice to the majority of high profile boulevards in 2002.

• Top Dress, Over-seed and De-Thatching

The application of topsoil and seed through a de-thatching operation typically follows aeration to promote grass growth in bare areas. This is a site-specific application and has become a cost-effective practice (less expensive than resodding) in treating bare areas and reducing weed infiltration, particularly in boulevards.

One of the problems with topsoil material is they can be loaded with weed seed from the supplier. Staff have been purchasing higher end topsoil that has been sterilized to ensure the only growth that occurs is the turf grass. Also, staff have been purchasing and applying wildflower mixtures in bare areas to promote growth of a variety of grasses.

Organic products have been mentioned frequently in discussions regarding alternative use. The environmental benefit to using "organic" products has also been debated as there are different types and qualities of organic materials available. Although typically more expensive, a good quality composted mixture must be used to ensure the environmental benefits are met. Staff continue to move towards utilizing more of these composted products.

• Fertilizer Application

These products can be granular or liquid products and are designed to return nutrients to the soil. The three main components are nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. There are numerous formulations each designed for specific treatments. Applications of fertilizer will continue on all City maintained turf including active and passive areas and boulevards on regular intervals.

Of note, staff purchased an organic fertilizer mixture ("Harmony") and applied it in Spencer Smith Park during the 2000 season. The procedure was very successful as the turf recovered quickly following special events. The material is more expensive than traditional fertilizer, however, considering this is a waterfront park, there are environmental benefits to using a high-end organic product. Staff will be considering utilizing this material on select sport fields in 2001.

• Irrigation

One of the greatest concerns with maintaining healthy turf is watering. Emphasis has been placed on ensuring a regular frequency of deep watering of ornamental shrub beds and select active turf areas. Also, funds have been included in the Capital Budget and Forecast for future maintenance and installation of irrigation systems as well as upgrading of existing systems to optimize their use (e.g. installation of timers).

One concern that exists is with the current state of turf areas with respect to their construction. Various trade articles indicate that the key to maintaining turf areas is ensuring they were designed and constructed for their intended use. In Burlington, numerous sport fields have been "converted" rather than "constructed", we have created playing fields out of passive park areas without implementing any design changes. A similar problem exists with roadway construction where the emphasis is placed on constructing the travelled portion of the road.

It is almost impossible to provide an adequate maintenance service level in the absence of suitable base construction. City staff have been discussing these concerns cross departmentally in an effort to educate and promote healthy turf practices. Also, through the horticulture staff person, existing turf areas (particularly sport fields and boulevards) will undergo soil testing. Detailed maintenance programs will then be developed based on existing design structures and needs.

• Scheduling

One very important lesson to be learned from the City of Waterloo experience is that monitoring and scheduling is a very critical component of a successful management program. As such, staff have attempted to incorporate "pauses" in the schedules to allow for planned maintenance. Staff will continue to work with the user groups to develop schedules which meet their needs as well as the City’s maintenance requirements.

• Training

Although this has not been formally mentioned, training is a key underlying component of a successful program. Training of staff performing the activities, as well as those involved in the development of the program, is critical. Staff will continue to develop their knowledge base and skills to ensure successful outcomes of this program.

• Alternate Turf Initiatives and Naturalization

Staff continue to research and investigate alternative ground cover in hopes of reducing maintenance requirements and still provide an acceptable aesthetic service level to the public at large. To date there has not been a miracle plant identified that can withstand the salt laden environment that exists within our boulevards. Staff have been using and experimenting with wildflower seed mixtures in specific areas as an alternative. Staff continue to investigate and experiment where possible in hopes of finding viable alternatives to the present grass monoculture which exists today. One positive initiative underway is the indoor soccer facility to be constructed at Sherwood Forest Park which will use an artificial turf in lieu of sod.

There are areas presently maintained by the staff that could be converted to natural areas. There are also areas that have been constructed as natural areas and staff have been requested to perform maintenance on. The key to implementing alternative measure is the acceptance of the community. Staff will likely begin erecting signs with each of these ventures as a means of providing the public with information regarding the changes to the landscape. Although the areas may initially appear unkept, within time they will establish a beautiful landscape that would require little or no maintenance. A proactive education campaign and education strategy is presently being developed in consultation with the Healthy Green Spaces project.

Also, with the assumption that new alternatives (to grass) would be encouraged to thrive, the City should then recognize the alternatives and encourage homeowners to consider doing the same. The City presently offers awards to those whom keep their lawns and gardens in immaculate condition, a similar award should be given to those providing alternative landscaping that have environmental benefits. Also, there are communities who hold "Dandelion "Festivals" and such, consideration should be given to community events such as these to encourage alternatives plant materials. Locally, the Burlington Sustainable Development Committee is planning a tour to highlight alternative healthy gardens called "The Green Garden Tour".

A communications plan has been initiated and information will be made available to the public this summer. It should be stressed that public information is key to the success of the program. Further information regarding public information will be provided later in this report under the Community Outreach section of this report.

The amount of pesticide applied by the City is negligible in comparison to that applied on residential, industrial/commercial, and agricultural properties. Staff hope that the community will follow the lead of the City of Burlington and consider reducing chemical usage on private lands. City staff have created a "Healthy Green Spaces" committee and will be addressing the issue through a community outreach program. Additional information is provided in the Community Outreach section of this report.

2.3   The City of Burlington – Lawn Bowling Greens

The Lawn Bowling Greens use similar cultural practices as above for maintenance. They employ modified equipment designed specifically for their type of turf, however, the cultural principles are the same and the frequency of maintenance activities is customized to meet user needs. To avoid repetition, only the pesticide component will be discussed in the following.

Due to the sensitive nature of bentgrass greens, there is no weed spraying done on the greens or perimeter. Strong, healthy and thick greens deter the growth of weeds. Any weeds that do appear are removed manually. The perimeter grasses are herbicide free and any unsightly weeds are removed manually.

It is both essential and critical for the survival of bentgrass greens that a disease control program exists. Turf diseases can appear overnight and destroy an untreated green in days. Examples of such diseases are dollar spot, brown patch, fusarium blight and pythium blight.

Alternative methods of disease control are being studied every year such as, better cultural practices organic alternatives, combined fertilizer/fungicides and biological controls all with the intent to reduce, minimize, and possibly eliminate pesticide use over time.

2.4   The City of Burlington – Cemetery

The City of Burlington maintains one active and nine pioneer cemeteries. The same IPM cultural practices are used at these locations. Greenwood Cemetery (active) has used pesticides in emergency situations to control weed and insect infestation. The remaining pioneer locations do not typically receive any applications of pesticide, although there have been requests in the past for weed control and spot locations were treated to remedy concerns. As this is a specialized high profile service, it is necessary to maintain the flexibility to use pesticides for specific control applications. In the past few years a standard tri-mix of 2,4D, Dicamba, and mecoprop in a granular formulation with fertilzer (Weed & Feed) had been used. Recently the front portion of the cemetery was treated with an insecticide as the turf was lost due to insect infestation. The area was subsequently re-established with topsoil and seed. Funds have been allocated for the installation of an irrigation system to provide better control of watering, assist with maintenance requirements, and reduce pesticide use over time.

2.5    The City of Burlington – Tyandaga Golf Course

Tyandaga Golf Course is a highly specialized operation requiring extremely high service levels for maintenance. Tyandaga has customized their IPM program (as per CC-257-92 RPT 12-92) to meet the needs of the users and use pesticides to supplement the program for specific applications. The focus is on cultural practices to maintain adequate service levels but periodic spraying is required as problems arise. Usage is at a minimum and the emphasis is on chemical reduction as well. However, at this time it is not possible to eliminate the use of these products and maintain the high service level required to meet the needs of the users.

Staff will continue to investigate alternatives in the above areas to ensure usage is at a minimum and seek potential alternative for the ultimate goal of pesticide reduction and possible elimination.

2.6   The City of Burlington – Forestry

The last major application of a pesticide used in forestry was in the Tyandaga area in 1990 for the treatment of Gypsy Moths. Since that time there has been very little pesticide use in the forestry area. There are isolated instances for the treatment of individual City owned trees for wasp nests and ants. These situations are initiated by the homeowner and are tended to when concern for safety is expressed. Staff will continue to encourage the practice of maintaining trees without using pesticides. However, there may be times in the future where consideration would be given to treating areas for potential destruction of treescapes due to insects, disease, etc. Should an application be required to address such as concern, Council would be advised in advance for approval.

In response to the City of Burlington’s recommendation, Dr. Robert M. Nosal, M.D. Medical Officer of Health prepared Report MO-41-00 for the Region of Halton’s Health and Social Services Committee meeting No-10-00 held on Tuesday, July 4,2000. The report and approved recommendations are attached in Appendix "B".

The highlights of the report are in the "Health Department Position" and "Conclusion" sections. Their position is "Although the research is not conclusive, it clearly indicates that we need to be concerned with the use of pesticides. There is sufficient evidence to warrant a policy of prudent avoidance." The report conclusion proposes "Municipalities should adopt policies to minimize the use of pesticides on municipal lands. Whenever feasible, alternatives to the use of pesticides should be used." The City’s strategy is in accordance with the Medical Officer of Health’s recommendations.

Initially there were two recommendations made in the report, the first to receive and file, and the second to circulate the report to the area municipalities. Following a discussion at Committee a third recommendation was included;

"THAT, in order for a coordinated region-wide discussion and detailed study to take place, staff report back to Committee concerning the feasibility of organizing a workshop with the appropriate area municipal staff and holding subsequent public meetings to include other government agencies, school boards, the agricultural community, and other interested private sector groups."

This additional recommendation sparked the creation of a region-wide "Pesticides Review Committee". This working group is comprised of municipal staff members from Milton, Halton Hills, Oakville, Burlington, and Halton Region. To date there have been several meetings. Initial finding of the group is that all the municipalities operate in a similar responsible manner when using pesticides. There are plans to hold future meetings with various stakeholders including the public, in an attempt to reach consensus on the issue of pesticide use on municipal and private properties.

To address the final recommendation of Council, a new committee comprised of City of Burlington staff and membership from the Burlington Sustainable Development Committee (BSDC) was established. This new initiative has been appropriately named the "Healthy Green Spaces Steering Committee (HGSSC)." The reporting mechanism for this group is through the Environmental Management Team, and through them to the City’s Management Committee.

The role of HGSSC is to raise awareness and change behaviour to encourage reduction of pesticide use on property in urban areas, settlement areas, and rural estates of the City of Burlington.

The proposed aims and outcomes of HGSSC are as follow;

• Pretesting or surveying to identify the existing level of awareness and behavior before any program. The BSDC will forward any input from citizens on both sides of the issue to the HGSSC.
• Utilize techniques associated with Community Based Social Marketing, in particular identifying barriers to changing behavior.
• Development of a communication strategy.
• Utilizing, where possible, existing material including messages and techniques that have already been analyzed for impact.
• Testing all messages and approaches including the use of pilots, as appropriate, consistent with Community Based Social Marketing.
• Identifying target audiences, messages, methods of delivery, timetables, and costs.
• Producing and distributing messages and educational tools.

• Piloting of education strategies where possible.

• Implementing the "Project".

• Evaluating the Project’s effectiveness using a variety of tools, including surveys.

It is anticipated that the committee will initiate a pilot education strategy in 2001. One of the potential outcomes of the process is the establishment of a Corporate Policy for pesticides that addresses the needs and expectations of the community as a whole.

Staff believe they have developed responsible Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programs for maintaining public lands which promote the development of healthy turf with minimal pesticide use. The goal of the Program remains such that pesticide use will continue to be reduced over time and would only be required for emergency situations or spot treatments. The maintenance program for 2001 already achieves this goal as it proposes to have little or no pesticides applied on sport fields and general green space. With the addition of two additional full time positions in horticulture and forestry management areas, staff are confident that they can achieve the site specific detailed programs necessary for a successful program. As such, Staff believe that a ban or by-law to restrict use would not be prudent at this time.

There has been concerted team effort in creating this program. Staff will continue the Health Green Spaces Committee, work with the Pesticides Review Committee, and the Burlington Sustainable Development Committee to establish best practices in turf management and promote reduction of pesticide use within the community.

Respectfully submitted:

G. Kotsifas, P. Eng.
Manager of Program Development.
Budgets & Contracts