The ban on the sale of 81 garden pesticide products came into effect at the end of July 2003, under the terms of the 1991 Plant Protection Products Directive (91/414/EEC). The ban comes because the original manufacturers of the chemicals have decided not to “support” them, which means they do not wish to carry out the required safety tests under the European Directive.
Householders will be banned from using the pesticides from December 31, 2003, and banned from storing them from the end of March 2004. After that date, it is expected that householders will be told to hand over leftover pesticides to local authorities.
The government today issued a statement urging amateur gardeners to use up their existing stocks before the end of the year. The products include the popular 'Roseclear 2', used to control blackspot and other diseases on roses and 71 types of weed killer. Banned products include those that contain:
- Dichlorprop
- Dikegulac
- Resmethrin
- 2,3,6-TBA
- Tar acids
- Triforine
However, as with this year's ban on the use of the wood preservative creosote (see letsrecycle.com story), there have been some concerns among councils about how they are to deal with the hazardous waste pesticides.
The Local Government Association wrote to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs last week to criticise the lack of any liaison between the Department and the Association.
Embarrassing
Councillor Ken Manton, chair of the LGA's waste management executive, said: “This lack of forewarning places councils in an invidious and embarrassing position with many of them finding out about the bans through press reports or through having been contacted by concerned members of the public who have seen reports in the media.
“Appropriate arrangements will need to be made, where necessary, for collection, disposal and treatment of these products. This all requires adequate forward planning and local authorities should not be expected to respond 'on the hoof' to a situation where there should have been advance notice of the Regulations and their implications for councils.”
Facilities
Cllr Manton said that many councils will not have suitable facilities at their civic amenity sites for the disposal of the banned pesticides and may need to apply to the Environment Agency for a modification of their site licences. New disposal containers will be needed, he said, as well as new specialist checks and specialist treatment services. Public health and safety issues would also need to be reviewed.
Cllr Manton said: “Having taken advice from the National Hazardous Household Waste Forum (NHHWF) and other LGA waste advisers, it seems that the additional cost to local authorities will be excessive. The NHHWF has estimated that around a quarter of councils are currently without a system able to respond to such service demand. For large authorities, the cost of such a collecting system, training staff, modifying regulatory permits and controlling service activities could be as high as 50,000 – 100,000.”
He added: “Local council taxpayers should not have to bear this cost, and the Association is today arguing for steps to be put in hand for financial provision to be made available to councils in England and Wales.”
The LGA reminded the government that Parliament's Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee previously criticised DEFRA for failing to alert local authorities to the regulations on the disposal of refrigerators.
According to the National Hazardous Household Waste Forum, creosote and pesticides must not be poured down drains. Local authorities will need to dispose of these wastes by high-temperature incineration.
Register for free to comment