1 Brixham Town Council Report No: 09-2020 Report Type: Public Title: Pesticide Free Town To: Community Services Date: 09.03.20 Contact Officer: Deputy Town Clerk Linda McGuirk Contact Details: [email protected]01803 859678 Purpose of Report To investigate the viability of Brixham becoming a pesticide free town. Background In June 2019 Brixham Town Council (BTC) declared a Climate Emergency and pledged to work with Torbay Council to make Brixham and Torbay carbon neutral by 2030 and to work with other local authorities to determine and implement best practice methods. In August 2019, following investigation into the Town Councils use of pesticides, BTC agreed to delay training the Lengthsman in the use of herbicides and resolved that further investigation was required into the practicalities of becoming a pesticide free town: Resolution: It was resolved that the Town Council: • Agrees to delay training the lengthsmen on the use of Pesticides and discusses a town wide ban in all public spaces with Torbay Council. • Carries out further investigations into becoming a Pesticide free town. • Community Services Committee to carry out further investigations. What are Pesticides and how are they used? Pesticides are chemical substances designed to kill pests and are commonly used to control or eliminate a variety of pests. The most common forms of pesticides are: 1. Insecticides – kills insects. 2. Herbicides – kills plants. 3. Rodenticides – kills rats and mice. 4. Fungicides – kills fungus, mould and mildew. 5. Bactericides – kills bacteria According to PAN UK a survey carried out in April 2018 revealed that there are 38 different types of pesticides used in UK towns and cities. In November 2017, EU Member States narrowly voted to relicense glyphosate for five years. This decision is often considered as a declaration that glyphosate is ‘safe’. Due to concerns over its human health and environmental impacts, glyphosate was in fact relicensed with the specific condition that Member States “Minimise the use in public spaces, such as parks, public playgrounds and gardens.
Purpose of Report To investigate the viability of Brixham becoming a pesticide free town. Background In June 2019 Brixham Town Council (BTC) declared a Climate Emergency and pledged to work with Torbay Council to make Brixham and Torbay carbon neutral by 2030 and to work with other local authorities to determine and implement best practice methods. In August 2019, following investigation into the Town Councils use of pesticides, BTC agreed to delay training the Lengthsman in the use of herbicides and resolved that further investigation was required into the practicalities of becoming a pesticide free town: Resolution: It was resolved that the Town Council:
• Agrees to delay training the lengthsmen on the use of Pesticides and discusses a town wide ban in all public spaces with Torbay Council.
• Carries out further investigations into becoming a Pesticide free town.
• Community Services Committee to carry out further investigations. What are Pesticides and how are they used? Pesticides are chemical substances designed to kill pests and are commonly used to control or eliminate a variety of pests. The most common forms of pesticides are:
According to PAN UK a survey carried out in April 2018 revealed that there are 38 different types of pesticides used in UK towns and cities. In November 2017, EU Member States narrowly voted to relicense glyphosate for five years. This decision is often considered as a declaration that glyphosate is ‘safe’. Due to concerns over its human health and environmental impacts, glyphosate was in fact relicensed with the specific condition that Member States “Minimise the use in public spaces, such as parks, public playgrounds and gardens.
2
As previously stated in report 20a-2019 there are real concerns regarding the effects on health and the environment associated with the use of pesticides. Pesticide Action Network (PAN UK) PAN UK states there is increasing concern from residents, local authorities and governments about the impacts of pesticides on human and environmental health. As a result, towns and cities across the UK are considerably reducing, if not completely eradicating the use of pesticides in urban spaces and are switching to non-chemical methods of weed control.
PAN UK works with local councils to develop a policy framework for a transition to non-chemical alternatives. PAN UK have successfully worked closely with councils like Bristol, Brighton, Lewes, Hammersmith & Fulham and more to achieve this.
What have been the effects of BTC suspending the use of Pesticides? It is difficult to clearly identify the effects (positive or negative) resulting from BTC suspending the use of pesticides in Brixham due to the continued use of pesticides by TOR2 in the town. The table below highlights the outcomes of the trial which was implemented August 2019.
Positive Negative
Cost saving i.e. purchase of herbicide, staff training and PPE.
Manual removal of weeds is time consuming.
Environmentally friendly.
Improved street scene as weeds are removed instead of being left to brown and die.
The Town Lengthsman Supervisor (TLS) reported the main benefit as being able to manage weed growth all year-round and in all-weather whereas pesticides are ineffective in wet conditions. Difficulty has been experienced with moss removal during the winter months due to the wet weather, a hot foam system would enable work on moss and weeds to continue throughout the year. The TLS raised concerns that some allotment holders are using pesticides on their plots which is detrimental to those plot holders who are practicing more organic methods of cultivating their crops. The Allotment Tenancy Agreement states ‘the tenant is to use their best endeavours to garden organically and encourage biodiversity. On those sites designated as organic, such practices are mandatory. The use of pesticides and insecticides must be kept to an absolute minimum and tenants must ensure that they are not left unattended at any time’ it further states ‘if using pesticides and insecticides, the tenant must take all reasonable care to ensure that wildlife and adjoining plots, hedges and crops are not adversely affected. It is suggested that if the Town Council pursues pesticide free status that this must include all Town Council assets including the allotment sites.
3
Who uses pesticides used in Brixham? It is likely that many groups, individuals and businesses are regularly using pesticides in Brixham. Further research is required to ascertain what and where pesticides are being used and to look at ways of encouraging alternative methods:
• Community Groups i.e. Pride In Brixham.
• Torbay Council/ TOR2.
• Residents.
• Allotment holders.
• Pest control services.
• Torbay Coast & Countryside Trust.
• Businesses.
• Harbour Authority/ Fishing Industry/ Marina.
• Schools.
• Sports pitches What are the benefits of going Pesticide free? A range of benefits can result from adopting a pesticide-free approach. With environmental being the main positive. Overview of benefits:
• Improved health for council employees and contractors due to reduced exposure to pesticides.
• Safeguarding of the general public’s health by reducing their exposure to potentially harmful pesticides.
• Potential financial savings for councils due to reduced spending on chemicals and compulsory training for staff applying pesticides.
• In contrast to pesticide application, most systems of non-chemical control can be used in any weather meaning there are fewer days when staff can’t be out working. This makes it easier for councils to schedule work time efficiently.
• Increased ability to reach goals under individual council’s sustainability strategies.
• Positive message for the public.
• Compliance with environmental and health legislation.
• Better habitats for bees, pollinators and other wildlife.
• Reduced contamination of water bodies which could lead to cheaper water bills and cleaner, safer water for the public.
What are the steps to becoming a Pesticide Free Town? Going pesticide free will require careful consideration and planning. Due to the complexities a phased approach will be required. The first steps to going pesticide free are: Step 1 – Investigate what existing pesticides are being used.
• What products are being used, where, how often and why?
• Who uses them? Is it a contractor, a sub-contractor or in-house staff?
• Look at any existing maintenance arrangement/ contract; what does it specify in terms of pesticide use?
4
• Involve maintenance staff/ contractors in discussions: are they receptive to using pesticide free alternatives?
Step 2 – Get support from the community
• Raising public awareness is key to the success of going pesticide-free and ensuring clear communication of the plan of action, and their reasons for change, to the public. If local residents understand the health and environmental benefits, they are much more likely to support the initiative and accept a higher level of ‘weediness’. It is also possible to get local volunteers to help with jobs such as hand weeding.
• Utilise the Signal newsletter, website and social media sites to raise awareness about the benefits of going pesticide free. Increasing understanding of the value of ‘weeds’ such as nettles, ragwort and brambles which is fundamental to halting the decline of bees, birds and other wildlife.
• Promote any existing good work being undertaken to reduce pesticide use in Brixham, including publicising any areas that are already pesticide-free.
• A simple on-line poll publicised in your parish newsletter/FB page, or a face-to-face questionnaire/ consultation can be useful in gauging community support of a pesticide free approach.
• Talk to other Town and Parish Councils who have already made the move.
• Organise a Full Council debate about making Brixham pesticide-free. Develop a Motion, put before the council, calling for an end to the use of pesticides on all areas of land under council control.
STEP 3 – Develop a clear pesticide policy
• The policy should contain a schedule of how the council intends to go pesticide free which should include:
1. When and where pesticides are used. 2. The times, location and circumstances of any ongoing pesticide
application. 3. The benefits of going pesticide free. 4. Any information about reductions in pesticide use to date or alternatives
already in use. 5. Plans for trialling pesticide free approaches – e.g. methods, locations and
how success will be evaluated. 6. Communications plan for engaging local community and stakeholders.
• Be mindful of potential exceptions to a pesticide-free approach - such as the treatment of Japanese Knotweed, one off infestations, or the management of potentially challenging assets such as sports pitches.
• Develop a specific pesticide-use policy alongside wider environmental policy.
STEP 4 – Implementing the Policy.
• Consider a phased approach. There is no one technique which will control weeds (or other pests) across assets.
• Ensure all relevant staff, contractors and sub-contractors understand and support the policy.
• Consider pooling resources (or sharing contractors) with like-minded Towns or Parishes. Some pieces of kit (e.g. hot foam) which may be prohibitively expensive for an individual Council, may be justifiable when costs and usage can be shared with others.
• Enlist the support of community volunteers/groups for pesticide-free tasks such as hand weeding, or for pollinator friendly activities such as creating wildflower areas.
5
• Keep the community informed. Make sure staff and contractors are able to respond positively to enquiries from the public.
Alternatives to pesticides in public spaces There are a range of different approaches available. The effectiveness of each method will vary greatly depending on the local context and environment and, in most cases, a range of different approaches will be required to replace pesticides.
Alternative methods include:
• Hot foam systems, like hot water systems, kill plants using heat, and can be used in all weather conditions. This gives them a major advantage over chemical herbicides which can only be sprayed under perfect weather conditions.
• Hand weeding is an option particularly for smaller areas such as playgrounds and on paths running through parks.
• Acetic acid dilutions have been used very effectively to control weeds on hard surfaces in a variety of situations. Acetic acid is biodegradable and poses no risk of bioaccumulation.
• Various types of manual approaches are available in the form of differing types of mulching. This is a particularly useful approach in ornamental beds and in parks.
• Flame treatment has been used successfully to eliminate weeds. • Steel brushing can be used for large scale areas such as pavements and roads and
in combination with the use of acetic acid spraying can be a very effective alternative.
• High pressure hot water treatments can be particularly effective and also have other uses such as chewing gum removal.
• Electronic control systems that kill stems and roots instantly and are particularly suited to dealing with invasive species are also available.
Foamstream technology. According to Weedingtech ‘Foamstream technology’ is the most cost effective, versatile and environmentally safe solution currently on the market. Designed to operate in any weather, it can be used for many different applications all year round. Foamstream kills unwanted vegetation including weeds, moss and algae using the precise application of hot water insulated by a biodegradable foam. We have been in contact with Weedingtech and with other Town Councils who are using their Hot foam systems. Demonstrations of the equipment can be arranged.
• A cost-effective alternative to herbicide and herbicide-free applications.
• Fewer annual treatment cycles compared to other alternatives.
• Machine multi-functionality spreads costs across business departments.
• Suitable for use on all surfaces and in all weather conditions, allowing effective planning of labour resources.
• No on-going operator certification, protective clothing or specialist training required.
• No safety risk to the operator, public or the environment.
6
• Can be used for all outdoor cleaning tasks including the removal of chewing gum, graffiti and general sanitization tasks.
7
Expenditure Expenditure incurred by BTC between April and August 2019 *Cost of herbicide is based on the amount of herbicide purchased between April and August 2018 (Herbicide is not used during the winter months or periods of wet weather). **Cost of training is based on the current number of staff (2) who will require training
Training Cost per item (prices correct in 2019 and may have been subject to change).
Total
City & Guilds safe handling and application of pesticides (PA1 and PA6a) It is recommended a refresher course is undertaken 3 – 5 years
**£435 per candidate £870
Materials
Nomix Dual 5 litre *£104.30 +VAT £521.50
Total £1,391.50
Cost of weedingtech
8
Torbay Council BTC can only achieve pesticide free town status with the support of Torbay Council. The Deputy Clerk has met with Torbay Councils Head of Natural Environment Services to discuss. The meeting was a positive start and Torbay Council are keen to work in partnership with the Town Council to look at alternatives to pesticides. However, at the time of writing this report Torbay Council are in the process of implementing major changes within their operating procedures, including the introduction of a new contractor ‘SWISCO’ who will replace TOR2 on the 1st July 2020. Becoming a pesticide free town will need to be achieved in stages.
Stage 1. BTC agrees to become a Pesticide Free Council (including all assets). Stage 2. BTC actively encourages the Community to look at alternative methods. Stage 3. BTC continues discussions with Torbay Council and works towards using alternative methods in Brixham. Stage 4. Phased approach, initially reduction of pesticides in Brixham i.e. stop the use of pesticides in parks and public spaces, seafront etc.
Based on the experiences of Glastonbury Town Council it is recognised that in some instance’s pesticides will be unavoidable and BTC, Torbay Council and SWISCO should continually review new methods of non-chemical weed/ pest control as they become available, with a view to adopting these methods as appropriate. What are other Councils doing? Research has been undertaken into what other Councils are doing. Throughout this research it is becoming clear that finding alternative methods to pesticides is becoming a high priority for many councils.
Council Outcomes
Exeter City Council trialling alternatives, we have contacted Exeter City Council to discuss and at the time of writing this report we are waiting for a call back.
Wadebridge Town Council
In early 2017, Wadebridge became the first town in Cornwall to go pesticide free, opting for hot foam as the most effective alternative and Cornwall Council are currently developing a County Pollinator Action Plan which involves a range of actions to better protect bees, including reducing pesticide use. See annex 1: Case Studies
Glastonbury Town Council
In June 2015, Glastonbury became the first council in the UK to ban the use of glyphosate and switch to non-chemical methods of weed control in all areas used by the public. They invested in a hot foam machine and are currently looking at options for hiring the equipment out to other neighbouring parishes in order to recoup some of the initial cost outlay. See annex 1: Case studies. As previously highlighted in Report 2019-20a there are lessons to be learnt from the way Glastonbury Town Council implemented becoming pesticide free.
9
Shaftesbury, Dorset
Has banned the use of glyphosate in public spaces.
Bristol Has committed to a three-year phase out plan.
Lyme Regis
A Pesticide Free Town Council. However, Dorset County Council continues to use pesticides on the pavements.
Frome Town Council
Amidst continuing concerns and questions about its impact on people and the environment, Frome Town Council has taken the decision not to use the chemical glyphosate in its work looking after most of the town’s parks & green spaces. See Annex 1: Case Studies.
Exmouth Town Council
Contacted, awaiting response.
Great Torrington Town Council
Currently investigating alternative, more environmentally friendly options for weed control. They have attended a demonstration of Foamstream, but the cost was prohibitive.
Bideford, Northam, Barnstaple and Torridge Town Council’s
Currently investigating alternative methods, investigated Foamstream and found the system unsuitable for their needs.
Brighton City Council
In March 2016 Brighton and Hove Council voted unanimously to ban the use of Glyphosate and move to pesticide free methods. The council has pledged to become a pesticide-free city within three years by halting its use of glyphosate.
A three-year plan is being developed to end the use of the toxic weed killer in all the city’s parks, open spaces, pavements, verges and housing land.
Vale of Glamorgan Has become the first local authority in Wales to eliminate the use of Glyphosate in its parks.
See annex 1: Case studies.
Hammersmith & Fulham
In June 2016, Hammersmith & Fulham (H&F) became the first London Borough to go pesticide-free, choosing to adopt a hot foam weed control system. H&F Councillor, Wesley Harcourt, said “While there is some debate over the health risks of glyphosate-based chemicals, there is no debate that at H&F, the health and well-being of our residents is our priority and we recognise the importance of a green agenda in better supporting that.” A precautionary step to ‘protect residents’ health’ and become ‘the greenest local authority in the country’.
Lewes District Council
In May 2017, Lewes District Council voted unanimously to stop the use of all pesticides in public parks and green spaces following a successful campaign set up by local residents. The Council’s contractor has invested in a hot foam weed control system which has replaced the use of herbicides. Lewes District Council will now use non- pesticide options for weed control as a first choice
10
whenever possible. The authority was among the first to pioneer the use of hot foam. A strategy has also been agreed that changes the council’s approach to land management, putting a much greater focus on pollinators and the critical importance of their role in the food chain. Residents are delighted with the results and its eco credentials, as are the local businesses and councillors. What Lewes finds most advantageous about Foamstream is that it can be used anywhere, in all weathers, requires no personal protective equipment and gives the required results. It is also fantastic at removing graffiti. See Annex 1: Case Studies.
Annex:
1. Case Studies: a. Glastonbury. b. Wadebridge. c. Vale of Glamorgan. d. Lewes.
2. The Foamstream System. 3. BBC News article ‘Foamstream’. 4. PAN UK Glyphosate Myth Buster.
Recommendations Brixham Town Council recognises the importance of the health and wellbeing of our residents and recommends:
1. Brixham Town Council will impose a voluntary cessation of the use of pesticides with immediate effect within the Parish boundary, including all Town Council assets
2. Actively encourages, promotes and educates the community to use alternative methods to pesticides and to continue to take steps towards becoming a Pesticide free Town.
3. Build a relationship with Torbay Council and its contractors to reduce the amount of pesticides used in Brixham. Encouraging a phased-out approach in parks and public open spaces.
11
Annex 1 Case Studies: Glastonbury, a pesticide-free case study.
Glastonbury is a small town, population approximately 9000, in the county of Somerset in the UK. In June 2015, it became the first council in the UK to ban the use of glyphosate and switch to non-chemical methods of weed control in all areas used by the public.
Background
In March 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) announced the findings of an evaluation of the toxicity of five pesticides that it had carried out. The evaluation included an assessment that the most widely used herbicide, glyphosate, was a probable human carcinogen.1
Glastonbury is a progressive town with a reputation for green, sustainable approaches to the environment in general. Whilst Glastonbury Town Council had already stopped the use of pesticides on its own properties, Mendip District Council and its contractors were still using glyphosate to control weeds and some of this spraying was taking place in areas of Glastonbury Town.
The IARC announcement had raised concerns over the use of glyphosate amongst members of the local community and town Councillors. On 9th June 2015 a Notice of Motion was submitted to a meeting of the Council for consideration. The Motion, put forward by Councillor Alyson Black and seconded by Councillor Emma George, called for the banning of use of all products containing glyphosate in the public areas of the town.2
The Motion requested that the subcontractors employed by Mendip District Council stop the use of all products containing glyphosate due to the associated health and environmental risks and in order to be in concord with the town’s Environmental Charter.3
In the supporting speech Councillor Black noted that there had been reports of declines in wild flowers and plants on Glastonbury Tor due to the use of glyphosate by the National Trust (NT) and to avoid this the NT had now switched to hand weeding in the areas of the Tor most frequented by the public. Councillor George presented a paper to the Council detailing the strong correlations between the use of glyphosate and adverse effects on human health.
It was also noted that although the evidence for the potential harmful effects of glyphosate was not at this point conclusive the town should err on the side of precaution and cease its use.
At the end of the discussion a vote was taken on the Motion and it was carried by 12 votes for and one abstention, due to the Councillor not being present at the time. In effect it was a unanimous decision that was carried.
12
Has it been effective?
Following the vote to ban glyphosate the decision came into effect immediately and thus an alternative was needed to replace the spraying. Councillor George had been researching alternatives prior to the vote and been impressed by the Foamstream system developed by the company Weedingtech. Trials of the system had been carried out in a number of places including Yeo Valley Farm, close to Glastonbury and also by South West Water amongst others. The results of the trials had all shown that the system was effective and positive testimony about the trials was made available on the Weedingtech website.4
The Council decided to undertake a trial of several alternative approaches and compared hand weeding, hot water and the Foamstream system. The trial monitored the time taken to apply the treatments, the effectiveness in terms of immediate dieback and the level of regrowth following the treatments.
13
The trial concluded that hand weeding was not viable due to the high costs associated with the labour and that hot water was not suitable due to cost implications. According to Councillor George the costs for the various products were a determining factor and the Foamstream system came out ahead of the other methods trialled.
It is clear that the running costs, post equipment purchase, were significantly lower than the other alternatives. However, the cost of the machine does need to be factored in and Glastonbury Council did need to purchase the Foamstream machine for its own use and then train its staff to operate the equipment. Glastonbury Council is currently looking at the options for hiring the equipment out to other neighbouring parishes in order to recoup some of the initial cost outlay. It is also estimates that over the long term the cost savings will increase.
In terms of the effectiveness of weed control it is reported that the Foamstream system took a similar length of time to apply and that the initial dieback of weeds was higher than for glyphosate. The regrowth following the initial trial was reported to be minimal but testing over the longer term is needed to establish the full effectiveness of the system.
However, given the fact that Foamstream can be used in any weather conditions there is a lot more scope for when it can be applied and how effective a treatment it remains. As a contrast glyphosate cannot be used in the rain and its effectiveness is diminished should rain follow application thus requiring further treatments or a less effective end result.
Conclusions
The example provided by Glastonbury clearly highlights a number of points that can lead to successful implementation of a pesticide-free regime;
• The will of the local Council and their appreciation of the concerns of local residents meant that support for trying something different was possible.
• The Council erring on the side of caution and fully understanding the precautionary principle and what that means in terms of protecting local residents from potentially harmful activities, in this case the use of glyphosate.
• A willingness to make a decision that will have long term positive benefits rather than just looking to the short term. In this case the decision to invest in the Foamstream system which in the short term had serious cost implications but in the long term will both save the Council money and help to ensure a healthy, safe environment for the residents and visitors to Glastonbury Town.
Annex 1 Case Studies: Wadebridge, a pesticide-free case study. Wadebridge Town Council – case study Information from Edward Treverton – Senior Groundsman at Wadebridge Town Council
1. When did Wadebridge TC become pesticide free?
Wadebridge TC became free from spraying weeds in March 2016, following Edward
Treverton’s appointment as Senior Groundsman. He requested for a no spraying
policy in his interview due to having a personal interest in no longer using
chemicals.
2. What prompted you become pesticide-free? What local support/opposition did you
have?
Edward introduced no spraying straight away from his position with the full support
of the Town Council. Local support has always been strong, except the questioning
of roads/pavements/curbs that the TC used to spray on behalf of Cornwall Council.
After educating the public, they tend to understand and agree to the cause.
3. What assets do you own/manage that are affected by the change?
We have 4 large grassed areas including Jubilee Park, Egloshayle Park, Coronation
Park & Wadebridge Cemetery. The hard-standing areas affected include our 3 car
parks and other roads/pavements around the Town that were in the past sprayed
on behalf of Cornwall Council.
4. Does your policy cover just weed killers…or wider pesticides such as rodenticides?
Our Parks team don’t use any kind of pesticide/insecticide, our policy aims to
promote the importance and value of a quality environment and its contribution to
the quality of life for the community of Wadebridge. Also to support our community
in its enjoyment of our local environment and to carry out our work in an efficient
way that minimises or eliminates its adverse impact on our environment.
5. What is your pesticide policy/environment strategy?
(attached) - to be reviewed
6. How do you go about introducing and implementing it?
The Town Council agreed at a Full Council meeting to introduce the policy and it
followed by ceasing all use of herbicides – the parks team didn’t use
pesticides/rodenticides.
7. What was the view of your contractors regarding change of practice (do you still use
the same business as before)?
All work related to spraying was in house, so no contractors had to deal with any
change. Any future contractors would be advised of the policy – this was the case
recently due to taking on a new company to clean our toilets and they mentioned
using weed killer on the surrounding area for aesthetic reasons but they were told
no herbicides etc. only by hand – no issues.
17
8. What alternative methods do you use?
We use a self-drive powered brush weeder, gas flame, strimmer and hand weeding.
The wildflower areas are about location and still having a management plan in
place.
9. How affective are they?
The methods are as affective, the difference Edward found was that the spraying
just lasted longer – even though spraying is still not a permanent solution.
10. What are the differences in cost between previous and new management
techniques/regimes?
Although there was the investment in the self-drive machine brush weeder, over
time this will even itself out as the sprays that were purchased were on a regular
basis due to the amount of use. New techniques can require more time and
sometimes more staff, however certain areas have gained back time due to weekly
strims turning into annual strims/cuts, especially the wild flower areas.
11. What has been the reaction/feedback of going pesticide free from residents,
business etc?
The Town Council has not had any complaints from the public or businesses of the
Town. The occasional person does ask the question directly to the staff on the
ground who are then informed of the policy – as previously stated this is usually the
pavements/roadsides that Cornwall Council used to contract to the TC for spraying.
12. Are there any specific issues/challenges/benefits you have experienced from going
pesticide free?
The only issues that have arisen are the leased land to local clubs such as the
Bowling club, Cricket club & Rugby club – these are ongoing discussions to look at
the options and bring them fully on board with the TC’s policy. The benefits are the
increase wildlife and habitats as the public being hugely complimentary once the
wild flowers are out.
13. Any lessons learnt/advice to other T&PCs thinking of making the change?
The advice we would have is that you can do it, to make the leap and not look back.
There have been no serious problems that have arisen from this change and the
pros far outweigh the cons. The parks that we maintain if anything look better than
they did ever before, spraying has not been missed at all.
14. Do you have any images that might be useful to accompany the case study
(attached) Wildflower meadows at Coronation Park, Wadebridge.
18
Annex 1 Case Studies: Vale of Glamorgan, a pesticide-free case study.
19
Annex 1 Case Studies: Vale of Glamorgan, a pesticide-free case study continued.
20
Annex 1 Case Studies: Lewes, a pesticide-free case study.
Getting into a lather over weed control
In a bid to move away from traditional pesticides, many councils across the country have been testing out more environmentally friendly ways of controlling weeds over recent years.
While some have been more successful than others – who can forget Bristol’s use of vinegar which led to complaints from residents about the smell – a council in East Sussex has spent the last six months trialing alternatives to pesticides.
Lewes District Council already has a policy of not using pesticides within children’s play areas but agreed to consider other options around schools, highways and open spaces where possible after receiving a petition signed by 1,500 residents.
In partnership with its contractor Burleys, the council carried out a six-month project testing different weed control options. The overwhelming ‘winner’ was Foamstream, an eco-friendly hot foam weed killer.
Developed by Weedingtech, the near boiling point natural foam acts as a thermal blanket, keeping heat on the weed long enough to kill it. It also contains a wetting agent which enables the thermal energy to penetrate the weeds’ waxy exterior walls, rupturing the cells, killing them quickly. The biodegradable system is safe to use near watercourses and in children’s playgrounds and can be used in inclement weather.
Andy Frost, parks and cemeteries manager at the council, explains that while it wasn’t quite as effective as glyphosate, the results have been impressive.
‘The Foamstream method that we have adopted is very good. We are finding that weeds require several applications to control them and that weeds with waxy coatings are more difficult to control. However, it is early days and we are experimenting with how long we should hold the lance on certain weeds, and how many times we need to go over a site.
‘The fact is that whilst there is any possible hazard from a pesticide, surely it is better to reduce its use and look at alternatives? The more people that use alternatives, the more alternatives will be developed, tested and improved.’
Burleys contracts manager, Mark Tavener, adds: ‘The hot water foam has proven to be a credible alternative to traditional weed killers although it is not systemic. However, if the weeds are treated correctly with the hot foam it can work quite effectively at eliminating the entire weed for good.’
Mr Frost explains that while the solution does work out more expensive than traditional pesticides as it takes longer to apply, the Foamstream could actually end up generating income for the council.
He says: ‘It can work out more expensive as it can take longer to apply and may need more applications. However, it has the big advantage that it can be used during the winter (making use of staff during a slower period), and the operatives do not need to be certified to apply pesticides.
‘At Lewes, we have a good partnership with our contractor, G.Burleys, and we will be jointly marketing the foam stream and we hope that other authorities and land owners will use the service whilst it is not being used in Lewes – to bring in additional income.’
As well as helping the council to deliver ‘pesticide free’ spaces, the foam also had other advantages.
Mr Frost explains: ‘Obviously the biggest advantage was to reduce the use of pesticides, which is one of the main aims of a lot of Lewes residents. It also allowed us to develop “pesticide free” parks by using the Foamstream.
‘The Foamstream can also be used for removing graffiti and chewing gum from pavements. It is also excellent at removing moss and algae from tennis courts and rubber surfacing in play areas.’
Mr Frost says the council will continue to use the Foamstream machine but will also be looking at any new developments in pesticide free technology.
22
Annex 3 - BBC News article dated 28.01.20
Zap! How microwaves and electricity are killing weeds By Emma Woollacott Technology of Business reporter
Image copyright Vale of Glamorgan. Image caption Foam weed killer in action Barry, Wales.
"Why are you carpet-cleaning the flowerbeds?" is the question most commonly directed at Jonathan Greatrex and his team at the Glamorgan Council parks department.
And visitors can be forgiven for their confusion. The Foamstream machines, now in use across the council's parks, do for all the world look like carpet shampooers.
But they're actually part of a move to clean up in a different way: by doing away with potentially dangerous weed killers.
Concern about glyphosate - the world's most widely-used weed killer - has been growing since 2015, when the World Health Organisation's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) said it was probably carcinogenic.
Since then, tens of thousands of plaintiffs have joined lawsuits against German chemical giant Bayer, claiming that its glyphosate-based weed killer Roundup has given them cancer.
In the EU the use of glyphosate is currently approved until 2022. However, Germany, Austria, Italy, the Netherlands, France and the Czech Republic are all promising or considering bans.
And with the tide turning against glyphosate, many organisations that routinely battle weeds are turning to some decidedly unconventional alternatives.
Image copyright Getty Images. Image caption This protest in Germany in 2019 was one of many in Europe against glyphosate use
In the case of Foamstream, this means targeted spraying of weed-prone areas with a mixture of hot water and a biodegradable foam made from plant oils and sugars.
"It's really simple to use, once you've understood the controls on the machine. Basically, it's like programming a car radio," says Mr Greatrex, who is parks and open spaces officer for Vale of Glamorgan Council.
"Although it's not the magic bullet to replace glyphosate, it has cut down massively on our use of it. And it's made us think more about what we're doing overall on the environment, so that's quite an interesting by-product."
In their efforts to minimise pesticide use, some are refining abandoned weed-killing technologies of the past - such as zapping weeds with electricity.
"The first patents were in the 19th Century: there were trials on the railroad, but they never succeeded because the energy was hard to control," says Karsten Vialon of precision farming supplier AGXtend.
"And chemistry was so cheap, so easy to use and so efficient that all the companies working on alternatives couldn't succeed."
But, he says, as weeds have developed resistance to herbicides, and environmental and health concerns have come to the fore, electricity has become a viable alternative once again.
24
Image copyright XPower Image caption Xpower system kills weeds with electric shocks
The XPower system, which attaches to a tractor, kills plants in less than a second by pulsing electricity through them to destroy the vascular bundles that transport water and nutrients.
"Electricity has no residues, a low risk of erosion and a high efficiency because we can control the whole plant in a systemic way - all of the plant, including the roots," says Mr Vialon.
"We can destroy any plant. The only plant we cannot destroy is a tree."
Meanwhile, a new device created by the University of Melbourne and spun off into a company called Growave is undergoing trials in Victoria.
Just as a domestic microwave warms food, so the microwaves emitted by the Growave system heat up the water molecules within weeds and cause them to vibrate. This ruptures the cell walls, killing the plant.
Meanwhile, microwaves can also heat the soil, killing weed seeds as they lie.
"Early data is demonstrating that using the Growave technology will be as cost-effective and potentially less expensive than current approaches to weed management," says Paul Barrett, head of physical sciences of investment firm IP Group.
"The Growave approach also has the benefit that it is not influenced by the elements and can be used when it rains, when it's windy or even at night - conditions which are not possible with traditional herbicide-spraying approaches."
And even before anybody gets anywhere near a patch of weeds, technology can be working to minimise herbicide use.
25
Israeli company Taranis, for example, uses computer vision, satellite and drone imagery to identify precisely what weeds are growing and where, allowing weed killer to be far more tightly targeted.
"What usually happens with scouting on farms is that scouters will head out to the field and look through different sampling areas of the fields to see if there's any indication of disease or pests or weeds," explains director of marketing Tali Brousard-Shimer.
"We offer scouting with drones and planes that fly over the fields at 200km/h taking pictures of each acre to indicate where there's any crop stress. These super-high-resolution images - sub-millimetre images - are fed into our platform to identify the actual issues taking place in those areas."
While human scouts can cover 10 locations in six hours, she says, the Taranis system can manage 100 in six minutes, identifying specific weeds as soon as they emerge. And, once the artificial intelligence has done its stuff, the system comes up with a specific prescription.
“If a farmer's field was sprayed with herbicide pre-planting, and after the planting there's still resistant weeds in one area, you don't want to spray the entire field because you're creating additional damage," says Ms Brousard-Shimer.
With mounting concern about glyphosate - and with few other chemical alternatives - Leo de Montaignac, chief executive of Weedingtech, believes that the alternative market is set to boom.
"I think that we're only just seeing the very start of this market, and I think that over the next couple of decades, we're going to see outright bans on traditional chemical herbicides in public spaces," he says. "This market's going to explode."
