Firms wary of pesticide revision Businesses see problems with notification system

WATERVILLE – A proposed requirement that business owners notify their employees and clientele when they use pesticides raised the ire of the restaurant, grocery and pest-management industries during a Maine Board of Pesticides Control hearing Wednesday.

A notification of spraying is an advertisement of pest problems and a guaranteed loss of business, argued Dick Grotton of the Maine Restaurant Association.

“We’re saying ‘We have bugs’. Now who’s going to choose that restaurant for dinner?” Grotton said.

The rule debated Wednesday would mandate the use of integrated pest management – a system designed to reduce pesticide use by requiring a pest prevention plan and allowing pesticide application only as a last resort. The rule would apply to all public buildings, including nursery schools, restaurants, stores, nursing homes, offices and apartments.

In 2002, the board approved a similar requirement for public schools.

Several generations from a Brunswick-based, family-owned pest management company testified Wednesday that the industry already uses some integrated pest management approaches like rodent traps and sophisticated versions of the popular bug light to reduce unnecessary pesticide use.

“It’s a good business decision, as well as a moral one,” said Richard Stevenson Jr. of Modern Pest Services.

However, the Stevenson family Wednesday argued against nearly every other facet of the board’s proposal.

When nonchemical means fail, the rule would require that businesses provide public notification of pesticide spraying unless the facility were scheduled to remain empty for 24 hours after application or a suitable period of time listed on the product. Only pesticides that do not carry in the air, like hanging pest strips, baited insect traps, or products that could be applied in pellet or gel form, would be exempt from the requirement.

The rule also states that pesticides may only be used when no one is in the area to be treated – a major concern for some grocery and convenience stores that remain open for 24 hours each day.

The proposed regulation clearly requires notification for the clients of nursing homes, nursery schools, apartment tenants and all businesses’ employees, but whether customers must be informed via a sign or some other notice is unclear. The rule speaks only of “persons who routinely occupy the building on a regular basis.”

Customer notification was supported by groups concerned with the health effects of pesticide exposure, including the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association and the Toxics Action Center.

MOFGA spokeswoman Alice Torbert testified that she would like to see strong notification procedures so those citizens who are concerned about exposing themselves and their children to pesticide residue could make personal decisions about when it’s safe to re-enter a building or even which stores to frequent, she said. Torbert cited research from the Centers for Disease Control and the National Academies of Sciences, which established links between pesticide exposure and such ailments as childhood cancers and birth defects.

“Without knowledge provided by notification … avoiding exposure is impossible,” Torbert said.

Members of the Stevenson family argued that there is no health risk from pesticide residue at the levels allowed by federal law, calling those who are concerned “neurotic” and recalling childhoods spent in playpens near pesticide storage areas.

Several of the rule’s opponents also predicted that the regulation would actually create health risks by discouraging pre-emptive pesticide spraying.

A provision of integrated pest management requires identifying the pest and establishing the scope of the problem before applying a pesticide. Opponents of the rule interpret the provision to mean that pest populations must become established before they are treated, posing far greater health risks from insects and rodents spreading bacteria and disease.

Pesticide applications are frequently made before any insect or rodent is seen as a preventive measure, testified Debra Hart, a lobbyist speaking for the Hannaford Brothers grocery chain.

Once bugs appear, restaurants risk being closed down by the Department of Health, Grotton said.

“The alternative [to pre-emptive pesticide spraying] is to allow thousands of roaches to run free in commercial kitchens,” said Stevenson.

Board members agreed to consider the concern, but staff members argued that no pesticide use would be barred by the rule so long as those at risk of exposure were notified.

“You can use any pesticide currently available … I think your concerns are way overblown,” said staff member Gary Fish.

The board is expected to vote on the rule at its next meeting scheduled for 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, Sept. 8, likely at the Hampton Inn in Waterville.

The pesticides notification rule is available online at http://www.maine.gov/agriculture/pesticides/laws/rulemaking.htm. Written comments on the rule will be accepted through 4 p.m. Friday, Aug. 13, and should be sent to Robert I. Batteese Jr., Board of Pesticides Control, 28 State House Station, Augusta, ME 04333-0028.