Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | A | Alternatives Journal

Ban stands: Canadian municipalities have the power to restrict pesticide use thanks to the Supreme Court and Hudson, Quebec.

Article Excerpt
WHEN the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously decided in June of 2001 that the small community of Hudson, Quebec, had the legal power to ban pesticide use, community activists from coast to coast celebrated a sweet victory.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The court denied an appeal (that had already lost in two levels of the Quebec courts) by two lawn care companies. The court confirmed that Hudson had the power, as do most municipalities in Canada, to set by-laws that respond to community concerns and that protect the general welfare of the public.

The motivation for the Hudson by-law, and the efforts of thousands of others across Canada, came primarily from mothers of young children. During the 1980s, this constituency of concerned parents had objected to pesticide spraying in parks and school grounds. The occasional headaches, nausea or rashes were difficult to trace to pesticide use. More seriously, those affected with chemical sensitivities could not go outside. For the most part, health effects were not directly evident, just worrisome. Especially galling was the fact that the spraying seemed completely unnecessary.

Throughout the 1990s, authoritative scientific reports drew attention to the special vulnerability of children to environmental pollution. Pesticides were particularly singled out for posing risks of birth defects, cancer, developmental delays, motor and nervous system dysfunction and immunotoxicity. People questioned placing children at risk for the sake of lawn care.

Many local authorities began to restrict pesticide use. Some acted merely to cut costs. More...