Red Rock
News
It’s not OK to use herbicides that’re
harmful
It is a
shame that the city of
But wait a
minute . . . Before those of us who oppose the use of synthetic herbicides fall
silent, I’d like to raise some questions about why Sedona’s “alternative trial”
was a failure:
Was an appropriate person, someone
with a strong interest in eliminating synthetic herbicide use, put in charge?
Was he given proper training and
oversight?
Were successful programs in other
cities studied and emulated?
Was an emphasis placed on preventing
weed growth, rather than on costly spraying and removal?
When problems arose, were the
directors of successful programs consulted?
If the
answer to any of these questions is no, and indeed it is, the public is
justified in expecting another, better planned and better executed trial.
Clearly,
there is much more the city can do to cut costs and improve results without
resorting to harmful herbicides. Some
examples include reducing the number of landscaped areas, reintroducing native
grasses and wildflowers, and using prison labor, or the labor of volunteers or
citizens owing community service. All of
these ideas, and more, are working in other cities.
When the
council chose to stop using synthetic herbicides in 2007, they had compelling reasons: the products they were using are harmful to
humans and the environment. They knew
that, and so did the roughly 1200 area residents and 70 business owners who had
signed petitions objecting to the use of such products. Let us hope that Sedona can get back on track
and deliver what area residents want: nontoxic weed control.
Carol Grohs
MPS,
Horticulture,