This column was printed in The Grower, June 2008:

This year, April 22 marked the beginning of a new era in Ontario. It was the official unveiling of Premier McGuinty’s province-wide pesticide ban – promised during last fall’s election and somewhat surprisingly both kept and acted upon by the government in seemingly record time.

Basically, Bill 64 proposes to amend the Pesticide Act to ban the sale and use of a specific list of pesticides – a list that includes 78 active ingredients and over 300 products – for cosmetic purposes.

The announcement of the legislation was full of carefully selected and thoughtfully orchestrated symbolism that struck a chord with many in this era of heightened environmental awareness: not only was it Earth Day, but visuals of smiling children playing happily on the grass of Queen’s Park while wearing anti-pesticide t-shirts were widely used by the media. On the surface, who can argue with protecting the health of children, of our environment, of our future?

Not surprisingly, the bill received and passed first reading that same day and is now progressing through the legislative process.

But what does Bill 64 mean for agriculture specifically? Yes, farmers received the expected exemption but as happens so many times, things are not always what they seem. The devil is in the detail and it doesn’t make sense.

The exemption for farmers applies only to uses related to agriculture. And while that seem pretty straight forward and simple, it’s not. The exemption does NOT cover farmers’ own “…front and back yards…including lawns, ornamental plantings, vegetable gardens, patios, driveways [and] trees.”

This means that even if you have received certification through the Grower Pesticide Safety Course and are officially allowed to spray your fields, you are not allowed to use those same products on your own lawns and gardens. So where’s the sense in that?

No one is better qualified to responsibly handle crop protection products in this province than farmers – especially given that we took it upon ourselves 20 years ago to ask for mandatory training and certification for precisely this reason.

And although the concept of not allowing farmers to use pesticides on their own lawns and gardens when they’re already certified to use them on their fields is a cause for concern, it is the potential longer-term impact of the ban that is more worrisome.

Will agriculture’s exemption be eliminated in the future? Some are already asking why farmers are allowed to use these products in food production when the average consumer is not permitted to use them cosmetically on their own lawns and gardens.

It has long been AGCare’s position that banning pesticides is not the answer. Mandating responsible use by all users – not just farmers – could be. But the proposed bill makes this unlikely.

AGCare has been advocating the responsible use of pesticides for more than two decades and we will continue to do our best to work with the government on this issue as it unfolds.