"A Controversy Over the Use of Herbicides in Fairlington Mews"

At the request of the President of the Fairlington Mews Board and the Court Representative from Court 11, letters and background papers relating to the use of herbicides are being added to this web site.

The controversy involves the seemingly opposing goals of (1) improving the quality of the grounds and (2) protecting the health of residents. The documents presented here represent the views of some of the parties who have raised the issue.

Calendar of Events

Report of subcommittee to Mews Board

March 13, 1999

To: Bruce Engelbert, Mews Board

From: Ron Patterson/Tom Corbin

Subject: Grounds Improvement Subcommittee Recommendations

Last Fall, the Board approved the establishment of a Building and Grounds subcommittee to undertake a study of Mews grounds improvements and bring proposals to the Board.

The Board agreed that the subcommittee could:

  • conduct a survey of the other Fairlington villages to ascertain what if any kind of herbicides are used on their grounds
  • secure advice from grounds experts - both individuals from grounds-keeping companies and from others such as other buildings and grounds committees and from maintenance staff from other Fairlington villages
  • develop short-term and long term proposals to bring our grounds up to an agreed-upon standard
  • develop a number of options for each proposal for Board consideration - some with the use of herbicides and others without, with all options providing cost estimates
  • recommend the specifics of a careful education/marketing process (which should begin far in advance of any application) to (1) inform Mews co-owners about the fact that we are now considering the use of herbicides as part of an overall process to improve the grounds and (2) hold an open meeting to explain the plan once it is proposed (but before it is finally approved) and to receive feedback from co-owners

The subcommittee was established and met on October 26, 1998. The subcommittee consisted of Wayne Connely, Elizabeth Grenfell, Jeffrey Van Ness, Tom Corbin and Ron Patterson. David Fishel and Sharon Webster had originally volunteered but were unable to attend the meeting.

Subcommittee member Wayne Connely researched the issue of grounds improvement without chemical control as well as with limited chemical control. Jeffrey Van Ness researched the issue of the health hazards of pesticide/herbicide use in turf maintenance. Each produced a paper on his respective topic (attachment 1 and attachment 2).

Ron Patterson and Tom Corbin agreed to survey all other boards in Fairlington regarding their use of herbicides. All Boards were contacted and those responding were provided with a survey form (attachment 3). Only one Board responded (Meadows) prior to the dissolution of the subcommittee.

Elizabeth Grenfell agreed to contact possible experts to serve as a consultant to the Board on grounds maintenance. We have one response - from Ed Milhous, Registered Consulting Arborist (see letter from Mr. Milhous dated November 24, 1998, attachment 4).

The following represent the recommendations of the subcommittee:

  • promptly select Chairperson(s) for the Buildings and Grounds Committee
  • hire an arborist, similar to one used by Meadows to make recommendations to the Building and Grounds Committee and to the Board regarding grounds maintenance
  • develop long-term plan (e.g., 5-year plan), with the assistance of the arborist, for grounds improvement
  • develop and publicize with co-owners an annual plan for grounds maintenance
  • hire a new grounds maintenance contractor - one which will commit to making recommendations to provide a healthy turf and one which will provide quality service
  • provide close supervision of maintenance contract work
  • if the Board decides on any use of herbicides, devise a careful education/marketing process, which should begin far in advance of any application, and which should
    1. inform Mews co-owners about the fact that we are now considering the use of herbicides as part of an overall process to improve the grounds and
    2. include an open meeting to explain the plan once it is proposed (but before it is finally approved) and to receive feedback from co-owners.

We believe it would be a serious mistake to continue to rely on your grounds maintenance contractor or the views of individual Board members or co-owners (no matter how well intentioned) to recommend to the Building and Grounds Committee or to the Board appropriate turf management, since it is patently obvious that the work over the past few years has had disastrous results in terms of the health of our grounds. Even if the contractor's defense is that they have only done what the Mews contracted for, it is our opinion that any responsible contractor would have detected the steady deterioration of our grounds and worked with Building and Grounds to recommend changes in maintenance activities, long before the Board decided to take action.

We are particularly concerned, for example, with the sloppy job in the application of the yellow pre-emergent herbicide (we believe it was a corn gluten meal product). If applied correctly, this product could have begun the process of effective turf improvement. We personally observed the haphazard application of this product on the grounds.

The subcommittee also agreed upon options to be considered by the Board regarding herbicide application as follows:

Option 1

  • apply no herbicides anywhere in the Mews; instead, proceed with a well considered program including proper mowing, seeding, fertilization, watering, areation, turf grass selection, and manual weed removal

    • Option 2

  • Option 1 program plus the selection of limited test areas for application of herbicides with homeowners' approval

    • Option 3

  • Option 1 program plus broad application of herbicides except where individual homeowners object (following extensive research, fact-finding, and information sharing with experts providing information at open meetings)

    • Each of the options has pro and con arguments and we recommend that the Board hold an open meeting, properly planned and publicized, to allow experts to answer questions from Board members and interested co-owners. The Board will then be better able to make an informed decision.

    We regret the circumstances which led to the dissolution of the subcommittee and apologize for the delay in providing this information. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions about this paper.

    Attachments - 4

    cc: Elizabeth Grenfell, Wayne Connely, Jeffrey Van Ness, Sharon Webster, David Fishel

    Mews Board Letter to Residents

    April 26, 2000

    Subject: Herbicide Use

    As most of you are aware, Fairlington Mews recently returned to using herbicides in order to improve the health and appearance of our lawns and to help maintain property values. The first application occurred on March 24, 2000. We apologize that there was not better communication about the startup of the spraying. The Board made its decision to resume herbicide use because of the increasing infestation of dandelions, chickweed, plantain, and clover that is significantly eroding lawn quality. It has been several years since herbicides were last used. In the interim we tried an organic weed control product that did not seem to be effective. We have hired the company TruGreen/ChemLawn to implement the new program (Blade Runners continues to have responsibility for lawn mowing and other grounds maintenance).

    The Board recognizes there are members of the community who disagree with the decision to use herbicides because of concerns about adverse health effects on residents. We had a conversation with some of these residents at the Board meeting on March 28, 2000. We do not doubt the sincerity of these concerns. Neither were we convinced by the evidence that they presented at the meeting and subsequently that the spraying program presents a safety danger to those who live in the Mews. The spraying consists of a liquid fertilizer and two herbicides (Trimec-Encore and Barricade). As is required by law, the herbicides are registered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This means EPA has reviewed considerable research and usage data on the products and has determined that they do not endanger the health and safety of people who live where they are applied. The major concern expressed to the Board is about the questionable safety of Trimec. Here are some facts about this product:

    1. The formulation of Trimec that is being used in Fairlington Mews is called Trimec-Encore. It does not contain the chemical 2-4-D as other Trimec formulations do.
    2. The active ingredients of Trimec-Encore are MCPP, MCPA and dicamba.
    3. MCPP and MCPA are phenoxy herbicides (as is 2-4-D). Dicamba is a much less toxic benzoic acid.
    4. In research studies, when MCPP or MCPA were fed in large quantities to laboratory animals, both were found to cause birth defects (teratogenicity) and both were found to cause chromosomal damage (mutagenicity). Neither appears to be a carcinogen. The key point here is that the damage was caused by the ingestion of high doses of the chemical, not by limited direct contact of dilute formulations of the chemical.
    5. These studies were taken into account by EPA before it approved the chemicals for use on lawns.
    6. During registration, EPA did not place any special use restrictions with respect to pregnant women or children.
    7. EPA suggests staying off the lawn after spraying approximately 6 hours or until the lawn is thoroughly dried.
    8. These are not new chemicals. They have been widely used with no accumulated evidence of adverse health effects.

    The Board believes this spraying program is an appropriate, responsible and safe course of action to maintain the appearance of our community and property values. As we have said to those who have expressed concerns, the Board is willing to reconsider this approach if it is presented with an affordable and effective alternative program. In the absence of such a proposal, we intend to continue the spraying according to the following schedule (dates approximate):

    1. Early May ---- All 3 products
    2. Early September ---- Trimec-Encore and fertilizer
    3. Late October ---- Fertilizer

    Small white notices will be posted on the lawns 48 hours in advance of each spraying. These notices will state the spraying date. After the spraying, another white notice will be left on the lawns saying that they were treated that day.

    We are attaching a letter from Bob Griss, Court 11 Representative. He presents a case for not using herbicides. We have considered the points that he makes and find that we have an honest disagreement about the safety of the herbicide spraying. We do not have an active Buildings and Grounds Committee to give us further advice. We encourage those who may be interested in helping to develop a well researched alternative proposal to the spraying to talk with Bob. We anticipate that this will be a major discussion item at the Mew's Annual Meeting in June. We hope that by that time those in opposition to the current program will have a proposal that we can consider together.

    Bruce Engelbert, President
    Karen Mahalik, Vice President
    Ann Loughlin, Secretary
    Gordon Avery, At Large

    FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE

    1. The Board of Directors chose to sidestep the perennial controversy about spraying chemical herbicide on the grass by deciding to contract with TruGreen/ChemLawn to spray the herbicide Trimec without encouraging resident input, without consulting with Court representatives, and without conducting a mail-in ballot among all residents in Fairlington Mews. We believe each Court should be able to decide on its own whether its residents want to be subjected to chemical herbicides.

    2. The Board disregarded all the recommendations of its Building and Grounds subcommittee established in the Fall of 1998 to develop strategies for improving the grounds. Among the recommendations of the subcommittee were: (1) inform Mews co-owners about the fact that we are now considering the use of herbicides as part of an overall process to improve the grounds, and (2) include an open meeting to explain the plan once it is proposed (but before it is finally approved) and to receive feedback from co-owners. The subcommittee identified three options regarding herbicide use by the Board. Option 1 is "apply no herbicides anywhere in the Mews; instead, proceed with a well considered program including proper mowing, seeding, fertilization, watering, aeration, turf grass selection, and manual weed removal"; Option 2 is same as Option 1 plus the selection of limited test areas for application of herbicides with homeowners' approval"; Option 3 is "Option 1 program plus broad application of herbicides except where individual homeowners object (following extensive research, fact-finding, and information sharing with experts providing information at open meetings)". Recognizing that each of the options has pro and con arguments, the subcommittee recommended that "the Board hold an open meeting, properly planned and publicized, to allow experts to answer questions from Board members and interested co-owners. The Board will then be better able to make an informed decision."

    3. Members of the subcommittee researched the issue of grounds improvement without chemical control, as well as with limited chemical control, and the health hazards of pesticide/herbicide use in turf maintenance. We believe these papers should be posted on the Fairlington community web site so that all residents in Fairlington can benefit from this research. One of the themes in the report was that "One of the best ways to keep a lawn weed free but easy to maintain and inexpensive is through an effective lawn maintenance strategy that encouraged vigorous growth of turf grass. Weeds do not compete well with dense healthy turf, therefore the maintenance of a healthy thick stand is very important in producing a weed free lawn. Practices which encourage this include proper irrigation and/or drainage, use of fertilizers, insect and disease control, and the use of the correct type of turfgrass for specific situations. The report then reviewed the importance of mowing, watering, aeration, the best turf, and manual weed control before discussing chemical weed control.

    4. In its fact sheet on Health Hazards of Pesticides/Herbicides, the subcommittee report clarified that "Children are at greater risk of pesticide exposure than most adults. Pound for pound of body weight, children not only breathe more, eat more, and have a more rapid metabolism than adults, but also they play on the floor and lawn where pesticides are commonly applied" and "have more frequent hand-to-mouth contact as well." The report noted that herbicide use has increased dramatically, and that Trimec containing 2,4-D is the third most widely used herbicide in the U.S. The fact sheet cited a US Department of Agriculture study which claims that phenoxy herbicides, like Trimec, are low in toxicity to humans and animals when properly used. The fact sheet recognizes that 2,4-D "has been shown to cause an increase in malignant tumors in some test animals" but also reports that "no information is available on the reproductive or developmental effects of 2,4-D in humans." The Board is not concerned about the effects of 2,4-D in other formulations of Trimec because the type of Trimec sprayed in the Mews on March 24 did not contain 2,4-D. It is ironic that the Board appears relieved that Trimec-Encore does not contain 2,4-D, since the EPA has failed to declare either form of Trimec as unsafe in the short run, and long term effects are unknown.

    5. The Board did not explore alternatives to the chemical herbicide Trimec which was strongly advocated by the Chair of the Building and Grounds Committee who served on the Board and has recently resigned. The Building and Grounds Committee has actually been defunct for over a year.

    6. At a recent Board meeting before the chemical spraying when some residents asked about alternatives, the Board dismissed the effectiveness of an organic herbicide called Amazing Lawn which had been haphazardly applied in a previous year. According to the subcommittee report in 1998: "We are particularly concerned, for example, with the sloppy job in the application of the yellow pre-emergent herbicide (we believe it was a corn gluten meal product). If applied correctly, this product could have begun the process of effective turf improvement."

    7. The subcommittee also recommended "close supervision of maintenance contract work" by the Board and/or by the property manager, Legum and Norman. After the recent spraying of Trimec on March 24, the TruGreen/ChemLawn company failed to post warning signs telling people how long to stay off the grass. According to the subcommittee report based on an interview with a specialist at the EPA, the chemicals in Trimec are "not all that toxic" to anyone but those who apply the herbicide, but "children and pets should stay away from areas where the chemicals are applied until the area is dry - at least the better part of an afternoon."

    8. The Board has assumed that only a few residents have any concerns about herbicide use even though a survey conducted in Court 11 revealed that 25 households out of 29 opposed the spraying (where there are at least five pregnant women along with many children and pets). The survey erroneously reported that Trimec contained 2,4-D which is an active ingredient in Agent Orange. We subsequently learned that the formulation of Trimec-Encore which was actually sprayed in the Fairlington Mews on March 24 does not contain 2,4-D which is the major ingredient in other forms of Trimec. Nevertheless, there are other hazardous components in Trimec including MCPP, MCPA, and dicamba that are often contaminated with dioxin as a dangerous byproduct in the manufacturing process of phenoxy herbicides. These chemicals have been found to cause birth defects in laboratory animals and chromosomal damage. But the Board doesn't think you should be alarmed because the damage was caused by high concentrations, not direct contact with diluted formulations. The Board claims that Trimec-Encore is safe because it is registered with the EPA and does not have a special use restriction with respect to pregnant women or children.

    9. Believing that chemical herbicides are the best way to handle weeds in the 11 acres of the Mews, the Board has not been interested in considering alternatives unless they meet the joint criteria of safety, effectiveness, and cost. The Board dismisses concerns about safety on the basis of many studies which show limited or no short-term effects when the herbicide is applied the way it is suppose to be used. The Board assumes that broad spraying of chemical herbicides is the most effective and least costly way to control weeds. In fact, the spraying of Trimec cost only $5,500 for three sprayings in the 15 courts of the Mews.

    10. This controversy over chemical spraying is an important opportunity to: (1) create some new precedents for utilizing the Court representatives to poll or coordinate Court residents, or use mail-in ballots as a way to democratize decision-making by the Board on controversial issues; (2) educate residents about the potential dangers of chemical herbicides and the possible advantages of safer alternatives; and (3) reinvigorate the once active Building and Grounds Committee to develop both short and long range plans for improving our beautiful neighborhood. -- Bob Griss, Court #11 Representative

    Home | About Fairlington History | Historic Designation Community | What's New | Real Estate

    Last updated: July 9, 2000