August 15, 2008
In the executive director’s column by Tony DiGiovanni that appeared in the July issue of Horticulture Review, we promised to print any letters we received on the pesticide issue.

On this page, we reprint three letters received by readers. You may read Tony’s column about the subject in the July issue of Horticulture Review online at, and click on Horticulture Review under the resources tab.

Ten years from now

Necessity is the mother of invention.

Ten years from now, I suspect lawns will be greener than ever, as new and better techniques come into play.

Yes, people do make a living in the spraying industry, but the writing has been on the wall for years. Change or become extinct!

Fighting a losing battle is neither productive nor positive. Energy should be directed towards solutions, not bitterness.

As members of a democratic society, the people have spoken … let’s work with them.

George Urvari, B.A.
Oriole Landscaping,

Clarified issue

Tony, your article clarified LO’s position for me. I was a little shocked when I saw the position a couple of weeks ago, but it makes sense now. I guess we have to make the best of the inevitable.

Technical question: is London’s municipal bylaw, which takes effect September 2008, now null and void? Or, would it be effective until some later date?

Jay Murray, TLC
London, Ont.

Editor’s Note: The municipal law would be in effect until the provincial regulations are brought into law sometime in the spring of 2009.

Kept it science-based

Hi Tony,
I guess I was wrong about Fibber McGuinty’s pesticide ban, after all. I thought this was a bad thing, but then I logged onto Landscape Ontario’s website and read your briefing note on the subject, and apparently Bill 64 is a good thing. I see that Landscape Ontario is also subbing in for Health Canada and deciding which pesticides are worthy of exemption in Fibber’s bill. It’s unfortunate that 2,4-D didn’t pass this science-based risk assessment, and the only pesticides that are exempted will be subject to a field audit for necessity, as determined by McGuinty’s lawn police.

You will notice that I let my membership in Landscape Ontario lapse. Let me explain why. When I received my Landscape Ontario magazine a few years ago, the editorials suggested that what happened in Toronto was somehow a positive thing. In fact, of what I recall, the editorial headliner proclaimed it as a “major victory for the lawn care sector.” Then I received my “educational material” from Halton Region, and it implied that I am killing people, with Landscape Ontario’s logo on the pamphlet.

I would still be a member if you and Ken Pavely had made this more of a science-based issue and less time flogging IPM. In fact, I would even have given you extra money in support of the cause if you had made your presentations before municipal councils as more science-based.

I take pride in the fact that these activists never beat me in Milton. Do you know why they never beat me? I got to know most of council on a person-to-person basis, and kept in constant contact with them on the issue. But above all, I kept this a science-based issue.

Clive Whitlock,
Guaranteed Green

P.S Please do not take this vent personally. You are a really nice guy, and we had some great conversations in your office, and at Milton Council and Kelsey’s.