Page 47 - Summer eng 2017

EXPERT OPINION
I sat down with Dr. Eric Lyons, Professor of Plant Agriculture at the University of Guelph and Director of the Guelph Turfgrass Institute, to see what he had to say about the Dad and the Dandelions.
When asked point blank, whether or not he felt that there are health risks involved with the use of pesticides; his response was simple, “I have to trust the toxicologists at Health Canada.”
He explained that there are inherent risks in everything that we do, including driving a car, walking on the sidewalk, the things that we eat, even the sun shining down on us. However, “It’s a lot riskier not to go out and play golf (due to the health benefits of playing the game), than the negligible risk that exists from the use of pesticides.”
Dr. Lyons explained that pesticide labels (from Health Canada) are designed to protect the applicator, who is working with concentrated product, up close and over many years. “Any potential exposure to a golfer would be a fraction of that amount, which has already been deemed safe. Again, I have to listen to the toxicologists.”
Sadly, that message is lost. The fact is that Canada’s golf course owners and superintendents, whichrepresent2,346coursesand 175,000 hectares of greenspace, are overwhelmingly positive stewards of the lands they are responsible for.
Pesticides are only a small part of overall Integrated Pest Management programs, and are used only as a last resort. Turfgrass and trees have been shown to reduce erosion, produce oxygen while sequestering carbon dioxide, filter water and air, and regulate temperatures in the urban environment.
Rather than presenting golf courses as chemical waste dumps, they ought to be recognized as
the oasis for the wildlife that they really are, so much so, that over 200 of them are either registered, or in the process of being registered, as Audubon Sanctuaries.
Dr. Lyons feels that the golf industry should seize this opportunity to tell our story.
“Golf provides both social and environmental services, parti- cularly in urban areas, while actually providing tax revenue, jobs, and economic benefits, as opposed to costs. We don’t want golf to go away, as it would clearly be a net loss, and communities would be worse off.”
He listed green space, water management, wildlife habitat, and the heating/cooling effects of turfgrass and trees as examples. The net gain to the overall health of the environment, and the overall health of the people who live around courses, doesn’t get the credit that it’s due, and that is without touching on the health benefits of actually playing the game.
Dr. Lyons offered this last thought, which ought to resonate with all golf course owners and operators, “It’s essential that we hire good people to apply pesticides. People who will take care, and follow the label instructions.Notbecausetheyare dangerous, but because we have a public perception problem.”
In the province of Ontario, Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programs are mandatory, and there is considerable public and technical oversight. All applications have to be rationalized, documented, and audited. Public meetings are held to inform the abutting landowners what pesticides were used, how much was used, and why it was used. Many superintendents have voluntarily adopted this IPM model of application, in provinces where such a program is not legislated.
TIME TO TELL OUR STORY
I began by admitting that I am becoming weary from the fight, and I believe that my fatigue comes from always fighting on our back foot. We are always on the defensive.
I propose that it is time to start turning the tide. Rather than looking at this latest attack on our industry as some kind of rear-guard action, I think that it is high time that we started to tell our own story.
Golf is Canada’s largest participatory sport, but if we want it to continue to grow, we need to reassure our customers, that the golf course is a safe and healthy place to spend the day.
We could all go back to school, and get PhD’s in toxicology, or environmental biology, or epidemiology, or chemistry – but we don’t need to. Health Canada, through the PMRA, is already employing scores of PhD’s in long white lab coats, to study pesticides and their potential threats to human health. They give us the results of that research, in the form of easily understood label instructions, and the golf industry employs qualified superintendents to apply pesticides, only when necessary, and in accordance with those label instructions.
I can understand why Andrew Nisker is searching for an explanation for the cause of his late father’s disease, but the conclusion that he settles on, in Dad and the Dandelions, simply is not supported by the best science we have on the subject. Like Dr. Lyons said, “I have to listen to the toxicologists.”
Golf Business Canada
Golf Business Canada 47