Lawmakers are considering establishing a committee to study the use of pesticides where children congregate. Under the house bill, the committee would also examine a moratorium or ban on the use of pesticides.

But as New Hampshire Public Radio’s Amy Quinton reports, just an attempt to study the issue elicited more than three hours of debate.

Most legislative hearings on forming a study committee aren’t very controversial.
But the use of pesticides is an emotional issue for many.

Some who spoke in favor of the bill say they have had medical problems due to the use of pesticides and herbicides on lawns.

Waterville Valley resident Ellen Fine is one of them.

She’s also director of the LEAH Foundation, an organization which advocates against the use of pesticides.

“Some of the symptoms I have gone through intense wheezing, feeling like you’re about to have a heart attack, intense shooting pain in my heart, neurological damage where I wasn’t able to walk too well, intense headaches in the back of my occiput, I would have difficulty forming words.”

Fine and other supporters say children are particularly susceptible to problems from pesticides on lawns.

The bill would establish a committee to study the use of pesticides in residential neighborhoods, school property, playgrounds and other places where children congregate.

But the proposal even to study the issue was met with resistance.

David Rousseau, the state Director of the Division of Pesticide Control, says federal laws already regulate the use and safety of pesticides, so a study committee isn’t needed.

He adds that having time to advise a committee on issues related to pesticides wouldn’t be easy.

“It will be a resource drain to the division and we just had some layoffs we lost three people in our department and certainly providing information just these last two weeks has been an incredible drain on us just to prepare for this bill.”
He says part of the bill asks the committee to consider a ban or moratorium on using pesticides- and that could have unintended consequences.

“There are some pests out there that are very serious that we need to keep an eye out on including Lyme carried by ticks, Eastern Equine Encephalitis carried by mosquito and West Nile virus and of course which is out of control it’s in every major city.”

But attorney Amy Manzelli, a lobbyist for the Leah Foundation, says federal laws surrounding pesticides don’t go far enough.

And she says manufacturers are often the ones testing the safety of pesticides.
Their animal testing, she adds, doesn’t take into account variables among humans including the effects on small children.

“Most of these products are tested in isolation, meaning one product at a time but in our environment it’s extremely rare that we would be exposed to only one toxic material at a time.”

Several lawn care providers spoke against the bill.

They say establishing a study committee is the start to an eventual ban on pesticides.

Roger Nouns, who owns a lawn care company, says his biggest concern is that fear, more than science will lead the debate among committee members.

“There is a lot of misinformation out there, and my fear is that propaganda and misinformation will get mixed in with fact"

Others who showed up at the hearing say the bill is written too broadly.
The definition of pesticides, according to the EPA can include herbicides, rodenticides, and even organic or so-called reduced-risk materials.

Alan Eaton with the UNH Cooperative Extension says the bill isn’t focused enough.

“The way this bill has been stated and worded is really really very broad, so if your focus is lawns, and if your focus is chemicals then you should consider wording something in such a way to be sure that’s clear.”

This is the first hearing on the bill.

The House Agriculture and Environment Committee is scheduled to vote on the proposed study committee next week.