Abstract
The use of pesticides on school properties continues to come under scrutiny considering health risks to members of school communities. Legislation in the state of Connecticut in 2010 prohibited the use of pesticide products registered with the Environmental Protection Agency on school grounds. Ten years later, this research seeks to explore the impact of pesticide-free legislation on maintenance of school landscapes and athletic fields. A survey was disseminated to municipal and school representatives in Connecticut. This is part one of a three-part series that documents grounds maintenance changes, grounds quality, and potential transitions to synthetic turf 10 years following this ban. Results indicate that changes to management systems have occurred since the ban. The level of maintenance needed to support healthy, pesticide-free school properties is enhanced due to a reliance on cultural practices. Pest pressures have increased nonetheless, indicating the need for continued educational programming and research related to best practices for managing and maintaining high-quality school grounds without the use of chemical applications.
Well-managed school grounds and athletic fields are integral to a healthy and productive learning environment. Attractive, uncluttered landscaping on school properties reduces stress, encourages physical activity, and improves the quality of life for school faculty, staff, and students (Dyment and Bell 2007; Matsuoka 2010). Natural turfgrass systems maintained for optimal performance and recovery provide many functional benefits, including soil enhancement, erosion control, and temperature management, as well as recreational and aesthetic services (Beard and Green 1994; Braun et al. 2024; Brosnan et al. 2020). Weed control in athletic fields has high potential to enhance both visual quality and safety of playing surfaces by retention of vegetative cover subjected to athletic field traffic (Brosnan et al. 2014), further emphasizing the need for proper and effective management of school grounds.
Increasing concern for student and staff health on school campuses has led some states to ban or regulate pesticide use on school grounds (Owens 2009), with other cities, counties, or states likely taking similar action in the future. In Connecticut, Public Act 05-252. An Act Concerning Pesticide Applications at Child Day Care Centers and Schools indicated a shift in the legal and recommended management practices on school grounds throughout the state (State of Connecticut 2005). The act, requiring implementation by Jul 2010, prohibited the application of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-registered pesticide products on day care and K–8 school grounds properties. Minimum-risk 25(b) products compliant with criteria put forth in section 25(b) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) were permitted for use on school grounds, providing they were registered with the State of Connecticut (Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection 2020; EPA 2024a). These products contain ingredients not thought to cause harm to humans or the environment, such as clove or cinnamon oil (EPA 2015, 2024b). Managed landscapes, turfgrass areas and athletic fields, playgrounds, and other areas on the school property are all considered school grounds. High school properties that were distinct and separate from K–8 schools were exempt from this legislation.
Considering that pesticide application has long been a valuable and useful methodology for the management and control of weeds, insects, and other potentially damaging organisms, adoption of this legislation necessitated alterations in management protocols by school grounds professionals. Survey research conducted by the University of Connecticut (UConn) shortly after Public Act 05-252 went into effect explored this legislation’s impact on school grounds maintenance (Wallace et al. 2016) and perceived quality (Bartholomew et al. 2015). Results from these studies indicated that although there were no signification changes in school grounds management practices post-ban (Wallace et al. 2016), quality of school ground properties as perceived by participating school grounds managers had decreased (Bartholomew et al. 2015).
Proper maintenance of turfgrass surfaces can help to mitigate the need for pesticide application (Henderson and Wallace 2020). For instance, applying high rates of turfgrass seed can enhance surface cover for athletic fields experiencing considerable wear (Minner et al. 2008). Although overseeding athletic fields to reduce weed populations in the turfgrass canopy can be a valuable practice to compensate for the lack of pesticide application (Gannett et al. 2021; Henderson and Wallace 2020; Maxey et al. 2021), a limited number of school grounds managers reported the implementation of overseeding practices on athletic fields post-ban (Wallace et al. 2016). There was an observed increase in the use of hand-pulling techniques for herbaceous weeds among a small percentage of the sample, but the application of such a strategy is labor intensive (Wallace et al. 2016). Furthermore, a limited number of school grounds managers reported the use of minimum-risk herbicides on athletic fields (5%) and ancillary areas of the grounds (10%) even though these products are allowed within the law (Wallace et al. 2016).
To further explore the changes in maintenance practices, playing surface quality, budgets and expenditures, potential transitions to other playing surfaces, and other impacts of Public Act 05-252 on school grounds property management, a second survey was conducted in 2021, 10 years after the implementation of the law. As a part of the broader study, this composition focused on changes in maintenance practices by Connecticut school grounds managers. The objectives of this portion of the survey were to determine the pesticide ban impacts on 1) management system selection, 2) level of maintenance, 3) importance and frequency of cultural practices, 4) adoption and/or use of minimum-risk 25(b) products, 5) management challenges associated with weeds and insects, and 6) most effective management practice(s) to control weeds. In addition to revealing opportunities for future research, focusing Extension programming, and providing justification for budget increases, exploring pesticide-free maintenance practices implemented by Connecticut school grounds professionals may provide guidance for contemporaries managing school properties in states implementing similar legislation.
Materials and methods
In Feb and Mar 2021, survey data were collected from Connecticut school grounds managers for the exploration of the research objectives outlined in the previous section. The survey instrument was developed through a collaborative process engaging turfgrass, resource economics, and evaluation professionals at the University of Connecticut. The instrument consisted of 83 items, including open-ended response, select-all, and multiple-choice questions, and was hosted by the University’s Qualtrics software (Qualtrics, Provo, UT, USA). Questions germane to this composition focused on management systems, integrated pest management (IPM) plans, cultural practices, product use, pest pressures and associated costs, and use of UConn Extension resources. Questions addressing other objectives of the broader study, including demographics, perceived changes to athletic field and landscape quality, field uniformity and safety, budgets, and transition to synthetic turf, were also included.
Surveys were disseminated to 611 e-mail addresses. There were 79 respondents; the resultant response rate was 13%. However, in addition to directly messaging Connecticut school districts, the survey was shared via e-mail to the Connecticut Public Works Listserv, Connecticut Recreation and Parks Association and Connecticut School Building Grounds Association members, and UConn Extension Sustainable Landscape program listserv participants and commercial vendors to maximize visibility. Therefore, not all individuals contacted may have been members of the target audience. Of the 169 towns in Connecticut, 57 were represented in the responses, including public and private institutions (Fig. 1). Characteristics of cities reported by survey respondents were similar to the state average for age, race, sex, persons per household, and education level (Table 1). The survey instrument was sent to the stakeholder group twice via e-mail during the month of Feb 2021. One reminder e-mail was sent in Mar 2021 to encourage completion of the survey. Data were analyzed using Stata (version 17; StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA) after data collection concluded in Mar 2021.
Connecticut cities and towns represented by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban. Represented cities and towns included: Beacon Falls, Berlin, Bolton, Bristol, Brookfield, Canton, Cheshire, Colchester, Cornwall, Coventry, Danbury, Darien, East Hartford, East Lyme, Ellington, Farmington, Glastonbury, Granby, Greenwich, Guilford, Hamden, Hartford, Hebron, Lebanon, Ledyard, Litchfield, Manchester, Mansfield, Meriden, Naugatuck, New Canaan, New Haven, Newington, Newtown, North Franklin, North Haven, Norwalk, Norwich, Plainville, Portland, Prospect, Ridgefield, Salisbury, Seymour, Simsbury, Somers, South Windsor, Southington, Stamford, Stonington, Tolland, Vernon, Washington, West Hartford, Westport, Wethersfield, and Woodstock.
Citation: HortTechnology 35, 3; 10.21273/HORTTECH05587-24
Characteristics of cities represented in a 2021 survey about the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Results and discussion
Management systems 10 years after the ban
Respondents were asked to categorize their turfgrass management systems as calendar-based, organic, IPM, or pesticide-free. Turfgrass management system is defined in this study as the pest management strategy as well as the fertility sources. A χ2 test showed that significant changes in management systems have taken place both at K–8 and high school institutions (Table 2). Before the ban, most K–8 schools relied on calendar-based or IPM management systems. Following the ban, almost half (49%) of participating schools transitioned to IPM, and 40% transitioned to pesticide-free systems. At the time of this study, EPA-registered pesticide products could still be applied on high school properties that are separate and distinct from K–8 schools and most (65%) respondents indicated that they have continued to apply pesticide products to high school and municipal properties since 2010. Within the same school district, facility managers may have chosen to no longer apply EPA-registered pesticides or may have adopted programs developed for K–8 schools to enable shared field use. Since the K–8 pesticide ban, there was a slight decline in the employment of calendar-based systems at Connecticut high schools, and a 15% increase in the number of high schools using IPM systems.
Turfgrass management system primarily used by town for K–8 and high school athletic fields, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
It was observed that 60% of responding schools or municipalities used a written IPM plan (Table 3). Most respondents (47%) indicated that IPM plans were updated yearly (Table 4), which may aid in finetuning management approaches based on observations from the previous year. Some managers reported that the IPM plan for their school or municipality was updated every 3 years (18%), and a similar proportion of respondents indicated that they did not know how often the IPM plan for their school or municipality was updated.
Use of written integrated pest management (IPM) plan by school or municipality, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Frequency of school integrated pest management plan updates or revisions, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Maintenance level and management (cultural) practices
Most (80%) school grounds managers indicated maintenance had increased and was more challenging since the ban (Table 5). Similar to the results of the 2012 study (Wallace et al. 2016), use of varied cultural practices remained the prevalent strategy for maintaining school ground properties. Mowing was ranked as the most important cultural practice/product by school grounds managers considering budget limitations (Table 6). Use of mowing as a maintenance practice post-ban primarily remained the same among school grounds managers since 2010. Although the frequency of mowing practices was not asked in the 2010 survey, the average frequency of mowing 10 years after the ban was one to two times per week (Table 7).
Ten-year impact of the 2010 Connecticut school pesticide ban on maintenance of school grounds and athletic fields, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey.
Products/cultural practices considered most important to school grounds managers since 2010 considering budget limitations (1 being the least important, 5 being the most important), as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Average number of times K–8 school athletic fields in town were mowed per week, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Irrigation, fertilization, overseeding, and cultivation of fields were also considered important strategies to maintain uniform turfgrass quality. An increase in the frequency of overseeding (Table 8) and the amount of seed used during overseeding since 2010 (Table 9) was observed. Findings of previous research support the use of overseeding (Gannett et al. 2021; Maxey et al. 2021; Miller and Henderson 2012), as well as fertilization and mowing at higher heights of cut (Braithwaite et al. 2022), as viable pesticide-free maintenance strategies. There was a 30% increase in the use of cultivation and soil tests as tools to manage athletic fields (Table 10).
Frequency of overseeding on K–8 school athletic fields before and since 2010, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Changes in amount of seed used for overseeding since 2010, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Changes in school grounds maintenance practices 10 years after the pesticide ban, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Before the 2010 ban, pre-emergent herbicides were reported as the most common pesticide application among school grounds managers. However, post-ban product application, including minimum-risk herbicides, was not as important to school grounds managers compared with the use of cultural practices (Table 6), and most respondents (56%) reported that they had not applied minimum-risk 25(b) products or biological pest control products since the ban in 2010 (Table 11). The use of minimum-risk herbicides on school grounds has increased since the initial survey of school grounds managers in 2012 (Wallace et al. 2016). Preference for use of cultural practices over product application may be related to budget restrictions or uncertainty and lack of familiarity about minimum-risk product efficacy or application concerns. However, given that both product application and cultural practices require an input of labor, enhanced outreach and communication related to the limitations and opportunities that minimum-risk products offer as either stand-alone treatments or in combination with cultural practices for athletic fields or ancillary turfgrass areas may be of value.
Use of alternative products on K–8 or high school properties since 2010, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Pest pressures
Unsurprisingly, an increase in pest presence on school grounds since 2010 was observed. Increased populations of weeds in school or municipal landscape beds, sidewalks, and parking lots (73% of respondents) and athletic fields (72% of respondents) were indicated by school grounds managers (Table 12). Invasive weeds were more of a challenge to manage for more than 76% of managers (Table 13). The presence of weeds in an athletic field can pose a risk for players (Brosnan et al. 2014). To combat weed populations on athletic fields, mowing (80%) and overseeding (74%) were the most common tactics of management (Table 14). Also, 41% of the respondents noted that insect pest incidence on athletic fields increased and was a concern, although another 33% of respondents perceived that insect pest issues remained the same in the past 10 years. Management of insect pests on athletic fields was more varied, with GrubGONE (Bt gallerria) observed as the insect control product used by the greatest percentage of school grounds managers for K–8 fields (Table 14). Forty-eight percent of respondents reported an increase in expenses related to insect pest control (Table 15).
Changes in occurrence of pest issues on athletic fields in the past 10 years (2010 to 2020), as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
School grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban were asked if invasive weeds were more of a challenge to control since 2010.
Control products used to address insect pests or weeds on athletic fields, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Change in cost of treating for insect pests since 2010, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Extension materials
Although most respondents did not use or were not familiar with UConn athletic field or landscape assessment forms (Table 16), 67% reported that they attended UConn educational programming or training events related to athletic field or school grounds management (Table 17). Enhanced programming on maintenance methods, in particular, is needed to support school grounds managers in navigating management systems without the use of EPA-registered pesticides (Table 18). Maintenance is an integral element of effective pesticide-free school grounds management (Henderson and Wallace 2020). Extension programing has been shown to support reductions in pesticide use and adoption of IPM practices in school grounds (Kowalewski et al. 2016). Other states implementing pesticide bans or restrictions, such as those detailed by Owens (2009), may benefit from Extension resources that focus on the management of school landscapes and athletic fields sans pesticides.
Use of University of Connecticut athletic field or landscape assessment forms to evaluate, support, or justify action of school/municipal integrated pest management plans, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Participation in University of Connecticut educational programming or training events on athletic field or school grounds management, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Requests for University of Connecticut turf faculty education efforts to support athletic field/school grounds maintenance, as reported by school grounds managers responding to a 2021 survey about the impacts of the Connecticut school pesticide ban.
Conclusions
Ten years after Public Act 05-252 was enacted in Connecticut, changes to plans and practices are reflected in school grounds management. The inability to apply EPA-registered pesticides on K–8 school grounds encouraged many schools to adopt an IPM approach to planning and system management, although when needed, pesticide application on high school grounds has continued for most school systems. Overall, school grounds maintenance is more intensive and challenging without the ability to use EPA-registered pesticides. Cultural practices such as mowing, irrigation, fertilization, overseeding, and cultivation are prioritized over chemical or biological products in pesticide-free school management when considering the limitations of management budgets. The frequency of overseeding and the amount of turfgrass seed used in overseeding events increased as a result of the Connecticut school pesticide ban. Although allowable within the law, minimum-risk 25(b) herbicides were not commonly applied by K–8 school grounds managers.
Pest pressure intensified following the ban and was still considered a challenge for school grounds managers 10 years post-ban. Invasive weeds are particularly challenging to manage on school grounds properties without the use of pesticides. Mowing and overseeding are the most common approaches applied in pesticide-free athletic fields and school grounds in the management of weeds. Continued educational efforts for school grounds managers focused on pesticide-free maintenance strategies will continue to be valuable. As dense, uniform athletic fields and well-managed school landscapes contribute to ecological and human health and well-being, further attention toward advancing best practices for pesticide-free school grounds is paramount and a priority for all residents who use municipal athletic fields.
References cited
Bartholomew C, Campbell B, Wallace V. 2015. Factors affecting school grounds and athletic field quality after pesticide bans: The case of Connecticut. HortScience. 50(1):99–103. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.50.1.99.
Beard JB, Green RL. 1994. The role of turfgrasses in environmental protection and their benefits to humans. J Environ Qual. 23(3):452–460. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq1994.00472425002300030007x.
Braithwaite E, Stock T, Kowalewski A. 2022. Integrated pest management effects on weed populations managed without herbicides in the Pacific Northwest. Intl Turfgrass Soc Res J. 14(1):783–786. https://doi.org/10.1002/its2.51.
Braun RC, Mandal P, Nwachukwu E, Stanton A. 2024. The role of turfgrasses in environmental protection and their benefits to humans: Thirty years later. Crop Sci. 64(6):2909–2944. https://doi.org/10.1002/csc2.21383.
Brosnan JT, Chandra A, Gaussoin RE, Kowalewski A, Leinauer B, Rossi FS, Soldat DJ, Steir JC, Unruh JB. 2020. A justification for continued management of turfgrass during economic contraction. Agric & Environ Letters. 5(1):e20033. https://doi.org/10.1002/ael2.20033.
Brosnan JT, Dickson KH, Sorochan JC, Thoms AW, Stier JC. 2014. Large crabgrass, white clover, and hybrid bermudagrass athletic field playing quality in response to simulated traffic. Crop Sci. 54(4):1838–1843. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2013.11.0754.
Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. 2020. FIFRA minimum risk pesticides – 25(b) product label guidance. https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/deep/pesticides/25b-pesticide-requirements.pdf. [accessed 19 Jan 2025].
Dyment JE, Bell AC. 2007. Active by design: Promoting physical activity through school ground greening. Children’s Geographies. 5(4):463–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733280701631965.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2015. Active ingredients eligible for minimum risk pesticide products (updated December 2015). Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-12/documents/minrisk-active-ingredients-tolerances-2015-12-15.pdf. [accessed 4 Feb 2025].
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2024a. Conditions for minimum-risk pesticides. https://www.epa.gov/minimum-risk-pesticides/conditions-minimum-risk-pesticides. [accessed 19 Jan 2025].
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2024b. Minimum-Risk Pesticide: Definition and Product Confirmation. https://www.epa.gov/minimum-risk-pesticides/minimum-risk-pesticide-definition-and-product-confirmation. [accessed 4 Feb 2025].
Gannett M, Bray N, Lampman J, Lerner J, Murray K, Wallace V, Yeh T, Slavens M, Thompson GL, Kao-Kniffin J. 2021. Repetitive overseeding for ecological management of grass playing fields. HortScience. 56(2):226–233. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI15419-20.
Henderson J, Wallace V. 2020. Best management practices for pesticide-free cool season athletic fields (2nd ed). University of Connecticut. https://ipm-cahnr.media.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3216/2023/07/UConn-Athletic-Field-Best-Management-Practices-2020.pdf. [accessed 28 Jun 2024].
Kowalewski AR, Stock TW, McDonald BW, Mattox CM, Daviscourt BL. 2016. Developing and delivering a needs-based integrated pest management program for public school grounds employees. Nat Sci Educ. 45(1):nse2015.0017–14. https://doi.org/10.4195/nse2015.0017.
Matsuoka RH. 2010. Student performance and high school landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning. 97(4):273–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.06.011.
Maxey GL, Wallace VH, Guillard K, Henderson JJ. 2021. Species, cultivar and seeding rate effects on non-irrigated, pesticide-free athletic fields playing surface quality. Intl Turfgrass Soc Res J. 14(1):403–411. https://doi.org/10.1002/its2.47.
Minner DD, Valverde FJ, Pirtle RM. 2008. Seeding rates that maximize turf cover when sown during traffic. Proc of the Second Int Conf on Turfgrass Sci and Manage for Sports Fields: Int Soc for Hort Sci Acta Horticulturae. 783:57–65. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2008.783.5.
Miller NA, Henderson JJ. 2012. Organic management practices on athletic fields: Part 1. The effects on color, quality, cover and weed populations. Crop Sci. 52(2):890–903. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2011.07.0359.
Owens K. 2009. Schooling of state pesticide laws: 2010 update. Pesticides and You. 29(3):9–20. https://www.beyondpesticides.org/assets/media/documents/schools/publications/Schooling2010.pdf. [accessed 28 Jun 2024].
State of Connecticut. 2005. Public Act 5-252. https://www.cga.ct.gov/2005/ACT/Pa/pdf/2005PA-00252-R00SB-00916-PA.pdf. [accessed 13 Jun 2024].
Wallace V, Bartholomew C, Campbell BL. 2016. Turf manager response to changing pesticide regulations. HortScience. 51(4):394–397. https://journals.ashs.org/hortsci/view/journals/hortsci/51/4/article-p394.xml.