Lawns chemicals used

TABLE 1.1 Predictors of U.S. Lawn Chemical Use Direction of significant relationship, positive (+) or negative (—) ... 

Lawn chemical use is only one facet of lawn care, of course, and myriad other behaviors are relevant to understanding people s relationships with their lawns. Yet this initial result already upsets some simple assumptions about people s thoughts and actions, and raises some straightforward questions. What makes lawn people act this way What influences their behaviors How do people reconcile the complex outcomes of their decisions ... 

Indeed, our discussions with residents suggested this sense of a neighborhood norm of lawn management is the most important driver lawn chemical use. Six of the eight homeowners explained their decisions about lawn chemical use in terms of something that they owed to their neighbors. Four lawn managers also... 

Patrick and Arthur described their lawn chemical use as something they felt they had to do to meet the expectations of their neighbors. Patrick explained ... 

In the past 10 years, chemical weed killers have replaced the machete and the hoe to a large extent in the tropics, especially in sugar cane fields. More than any other chemical, 2,4-D and its derivatives are used. Herbicides could also be used profitably to a greater extent in crops such as pineapple, rubber, rice, coffee, pastures, and lawns. Methods and chemicals used in Puerto Rico are described and results are compared with other areas. 

What is perhaps most remarkable is that people who use chemicals on their lawn tend to be more likely to believe that lawn care has a negative effect on local water quality than people who do not. This somewhat counterintuitive finding (consider that those who do not claim lawn chemicals are a problem are less likely to actually use them ) certainly suggests that values and ideas (what... 

Carbaryl is perhaps one of the best studied of the major lawn chemicals, and evidence of health-related risks related to its use date as early as the late 1960s, when studies of the chemical revealed both its toxicity and its potential impact on animal (and potentially human) reproduction. In 1969 the U.S. Department of Health Education and Welfare recommended restrictions on the use of the chemical, owing to mounting evidence that it may be tetragenic (causing birth defects). Later research in the 1980s pointed towards the possible implication of carbaryl in neurotoxicity, brain function, and aggressive behavior. ... 

Measurements of actual house dust in sampled residences where people use lawn chemicals is more disturbing. Even if the immediate exposure to these chemicals-now clinging to boots, shirtsleeves, and socks-did not prove a risk, the chemicals that hitchhike with us indoors have a more complex fate. Now released from clothing and accumulating in the home, chemicals with purportedly short half-lives begin to become more persistent. By settling in house dust, and therefore on carpets, the highest level of exposure falls on those close to the floor, which includes pets, but more importantly, toddlers, infants, and small children, who are disproportionately sensitive to the possible effects of these chemicals. ... 

Just as in the early history of lawn chemicals, when only a handful of toxic substances dominated the market, known risks concerning these substances has never stood in the way of their use and marketing. As in the case of both lead arsenate and DDT, as long as any level of uncertainty concerning the exact risks... 

The survey results briefly outlined in Chapter 1 tell us something in this regard lawn chemical users are wealthier urban and suburban people whose neighbors tend to use chemicals, and who tend to be more worried about chemical usagethan those who do not use them. This contradicts many of the most commonly used predictors of green conduct. Higher education, as an obvious... 

Add to this the fact that a majority of people (52%) surveyed believe that their neighbors use lawn chemicals. The effects of these uses, while considered deleterious for water quality, were also viewed as good for the community. While most reported that their neighbors practices had no impact or negative impact on water quality, half also agreed that these practices had a positive impact on property values (Table 6.2). 

As noted in Chapter f, homeowners with higher incomes and higher property values are more likely to use lawn chemicals than homeowners with lower property values. The cost of lawn care chemicals certainly plays some role in differential use. According to the National Gardening Association, U.S. households spend 222 each on lawn care equipment and chemicals annually, the marginal cost of such an investment this climbs considerably in households with incomes less than 30,000. ... 

Of course I am concerned about the environment. Of course there is always a little bit of a risk [when using lawn chemicals], but it is small enough that it is not going to stop me. 

Walter, Suzanne, Tom, Patrick, and Frank all expressed concern over the impact of their use of lawn chemicals as specifically being concerned about the children in the neighborhood. Frank does not let his children into the yard for several days after a treatment. Suzanne talked about some of her friends who have stopped their treatments because they have small children at home. Tom said,... 

As noted in Chapter 1, Suzanne s anxieties extended to her dog, though not to the point of changing her lawn care behaviors. Similarly, Patrick, Walter, and Frank all expressed concern over the impact of their chemical use on their dogs. (Tom did not have any pets). Frank explained that his dog is not allowed outside for several days after a lawn treatment or until after it rains. Patrick said ... 

Our group of neighbors together told us three typical stories to explain their use of lawn chemicals despite knowledge of their hazards. The first of these-centeiing on trust in professional experts-was most common, since several residents employed other people to manage their lawns. Generally, residents believed that because lawn chemical producers and the companies that apply... 

Tom never asserted the possibility that he may be using the chemicals in the wrong way, at the wrong times, or in the wrong amounts. Tom also avoided discussing the possibility that the manufacturer itself may be causing environmental risk. Tom s story provides an interesting contrast to the liability claims of lawn chemical producers themselves, who assert that the environmental fate of lawn chemicals rests solely with the user. 

Walter, who uses a lawn care company, and Patrick who is a do-it-yourself apph-cator, both openly distrusted lawn chemical companies. Walter explained his uneasy relationship with his lawn care company. 

---