Originally Posted by Skipster
I don't see EPA regulating LCOs any more than it does golf courses or sod farms. But, there are many more acres of lawns than golf or sod and there are more LCOs than golf courses or sod farms. Although fines to golf courses are typically larger than to LCOs, there are way more LCOs with violations than golf courses.
The bottom line is that the regulators think they can trust the golf and sod guys more than LCOs because golf and sod producers are typically more educated (I know -- not always, but typically) and the barriers to entry are higher in those industries. All it takes to be an LCO is a truck, spreader, and sprayer.
If we demonstrate that we are interested in education and that we follow labels and regulations correctly, maybe the regulations will lighten up.
Did it ever occur to anyone why MSMA is not banned for golf and sod use, but it is for LCOs, even though the main risk (and reason for re-registration denial) was a golf application? The regulators think they can trust the college educated golf course superintendent more than the hillbilly-in-a-truck LCO.
Not passing a judgement on anyone -- that's just what they think and I think we can change that, but it's goign to take a concerted effort.
Golf courses get to keep products because the higher the turf quality. The higher the golf traffic which generate lots of tax $ for the state. Golf is tax $. Important state revenue. They can keep good products to keep quality high to get rounds of golf played and making $.
Turf applicators generate no state $. There apps don't count as much. In Fl anyway.
Posted via Mobile Device