Docstoc

Fertilizer_TF_Summary_Nov07_Draft

Document Sample
Fertilizer_TF_Summary_Nov07_Draft Powered By Docstoc
					        FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES

                   FACILITATOR’S SUMMARY REPORT
                        November 14, 2007 MEETING IV
                                  Tallahassee, Florida
                              Meeting Design & Facilitation By



                                          Quic kTime™ and a
                                TIFF (Uncompres sed) dec ompress or
                                   are needed to s ee this pic ture.




                           Report By Robert Jones and Jeff A. Blair
                       Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium (FCRC)
                                   Florida State University




Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Website: http://consensus.fsu.edu/Fertilizer-Task-
Force/index.html Florida Consensus Resolutions Consortium Website: http:// consensus.fsu.edu
                                            FLORIDA CONSUMER FERTILIZER TASK FORCE
                                                       Meeting IV
                                                     November 14, 2007
                    FACILITATORS’ SUMMARY MEETING REPORT
                                                               Tallahassee, Florida
                                                                          CONTENTS
COVER ...................................................................................................................................................................
CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................................................... 1
OVERVIEW OF WORKGROUP’S KEY DISCUSSIONS AND ACTIONS ......................................................... 2

FACILITATORS’ SUMMARY MEETING REPORT.......................................................................................... 4

A. WELCOME, INTRODUCTIONS AND REVIEW OF AGENDA AND ADOPTION OF NOVEMBER 2,
   2007 TASK FORCE REPORT ....................................................................................................................... 4

B. COMMITTEE ON FUTURE RESEARCH SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS ........................... 4

C. BRIEFING PRESENTATIONS .................................................................................................................... 7
  1. OVERVIEW OF DACS EXISTING AUTHORITIES REGARDING FERTILIZER REGULATION,
     JOHN COSTIGAN, DACS DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL, .................................................................... 7
 2. PRESENTATION ON DRAFT LOCAL GOVERNMENT MODEL ORDINANCE, ERIC LIVINGSTON
    & JACK MERRIAM ....................................................................................................................................... 8
    a. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF MODEL ORDINANCE .......................................................... 8
    b. NEXT STEPS-MODEL ORDINANCE REFINEMENTS AND REVIEW ............................................... 11
    c. ADOPTING LEGISLATION FOR THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT MODEL ORDINANCE .................... 11
  3. PRESENTATION ON EXPANDING THE LIMITED COMMERCIAL LANDSCAPE
     MAINTENANCE CERTIFICATION PROGRAM, STEVE DWINELL, DACS DEPUTY DIRECTOR .. 13
  4. CONSUMER EDUCATION BEST PRACTICES, RICH MARTINEZ .................................................... 14

D. PUBLIC COMMENTS ................................................................................................................................. 16

E. NEXT STEPS AND ASSIGNMENTS .......................................................................................................... 18

Appendices ..................................................................................................................................................................... 20
#1 Consumer Fertilizer Task Force November 14, 2007 Meeting Agenda .......................................................................... 20
#2 Meeting Evaluation Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 22
#3 Future Research Subcommittee Report and Recommendations .......................................................................................... 23
#4 Draft Local Government Model Ordinance ..................................................................................................................... 26
#5 Consumer Education Best Practices ................................................................................................................................. 40
#6 Public Sign In List and Public Comment Forms ............................................................................................................. 41


DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007                                                                            1
OVERVIEW OF TASK FORCE’S KEY DISCUSSIONS AND ACTIONS
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2007

Agenda Review and Task Force Plan Overview
Following are the key agenda items discussed at Meeting IV:

   To Approve Regular Procedural Topics (Agenda, Report, and Workplan Schedule)
   To Hear Reports and Updates on Task Force Assigned Issues
   To Review Consumer Fertilizer Regulation, Management Strategies and Uses Options
   To Hear/Discuss Topical Presentations Related to Key Task Force Issues
   To Identify Additional Key Issues Regarding Refinements for Regulation, Management Strategies
    and Use of Consumer Fertilizers
   To Identify Additional Options for Addressing Key Issues
   To Discuss and Evaluate Level of Acceptability for Proposed Options
   To Identify Needed Next Steps and Agenda Items for Next Meeting
   To Receive Public Comment on Task Force’s Work Product to Date

Task Force Member Attendance
Meeting IV was opened at approximately 8:35 am on November 14 and the following members and
alternates attended: Scott Dudley for Mayor Jay Arend, Chris Finkbeiner for Senator David Aronberg,
Peter John Barile, Eric Livingston for Jerry Brooks, Richard Budell, Casey Fitzgerald, Richard Martinez,
Gail Albritton for Representative Bryan Nelson, Ron Olson, Andy Rackley, Jerry Sartain, Karen Taylor,
Commissioner Jon Thaxton

DACS Staff Attendance
George Hayslip

Facilitation
The meeting was facilitated by Jeff Blair and Robert Jones from the Florida Conflict Resolution
Consortium at Florida State University. Information at: http://consensus.fsu.edu/

Project Webpage:
http://consensus.fsu.edu/Fertilizer-Task-Force/index.html

Welcome and Opening
Chair Andy Rackley opened the meeting, welcomed the members to the fourth meeting and indicated
he felt the Task Force was making progress but that following this meeting there were only two more
scheduled Task Force meetings. He noted and this was an important meeting in terms of briefing and
addressing the question of a local government model ordinance and criteria for stricter local
government ordinances than statewide minimum standards. He asked the Task Force facilitator, Jeff
Blair to take a roll call of members and review the agenda and other procedural matters.

Process Review
Jeff Blair, the Task Force facilitator, reviewed the objectives and agenda for this meeting.

DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007        2
Agenda and Consensus Guidelines Review and Approval of November 2, Draft Meeting
Summary
The Task Force voted unanimously, 9 - 0 in favor, to approve the agenda as presented. The Task Force
voted unanimously, 9 - 0 in favor, to approve the draft November 2 Task Force Meeting summary as
presented.

Review of the Subcommittee on Future Research
Dr. Peter Barile presented the work to date and draft recommendations of the subcommittee. The Task
Force adopted those recommendations regarding future research, added two topics and asked the
Subcommittee to revise their draft recommendations based on the Task Force discussion.

Presentations were made on DACS statutory authority over consumer fertilizer, Local Government
Model Ordinance, DACS Proposal for Applicator Certification, Industry consumer education best
practices:
     John Costigan, DACS Deputy General Counsel, Overview of DACS Existing Authorities
        Regarding Fertilizer Regulation
     Eric Livingston, DEP & Jack Merriam, Sarasota County, Presentation on the Draft Local
        Government Model Ordinance.
     Steve Dwinell, DACS presentation on expanding the existing ―Limited Commercial Landscape
        Maintenance Certification‖ program (LMP) to include fertilizer applicators.
     Consumer Education Best Practices—Industry Presentation: (Rich Martinez, Task Force member)

Review of Model Ordinance and Criteria for Stricter Local Standards
The Task Force discussed reflections on the briefing presentations and tested the acceptability of a
series of statements:
      On the state legislation adopting a model ordinance.
      On criteria for additional or stricter standards in local government ordinances.
      On the role that the DACS turf rule should play in this context.
      On a certification program building on the DACS LMP as a local government mechanism to
         address industry education
      On a set of consumer education best practices.

General Public Comment
Members of the public were invited to address the Task Force. In addition, the public was encouraged
to provide written comments on the form provided in the agenda packets. The Facilitator noted that all
written comments would be included in the Facilitator’s Summary Reports. 12 members of the public
addressed the Task Force and 5 members of the public provided written comments and documents for
the Task Force’s consideration.

Adjourn
The Board voted unanimously, 9 – 0 in support, to adjourn at 3:40 PM.




DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007    3
          FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES

                       FACILITATOR’S SUMMARY REPORT
                            November 14, 2007 MEETING IV
                                       Tallahassee, Florida
A. WELCOME, INTRODUCTIONS, REVIEW OF AGENDA AND NOVEMBER 2, 2007
   TASK FORCE MEETING SUMMARY
Chair Andy Rackley opened the meeting, welcomed the members to the Task Force’s fourth
meeting and indicated he felt the Task Force had a very productive third meeting which featured
briefings and development of language on key issues surrounding the development of a model
ordinance. He asked the Task Force facilitator, Jeff Blair to take a roll call of members and review
the agenda. The members adopted the agenda and then reviewed and unanimously adopted the
November 2, 2007 meeting summary.

B. SUBCOMMITTEE ON FUTURE RESEARCH REPORT
The facilitator noted the Subcommittee on Future Research charge from the October 12 Task Force
meeting which included direction to seek expert advisors from DEP, DOH, SJWMD, industry and
IFAS and to:
   Clarify what is the existing best available scientific research related to the Task Force’s charge and
     mission; and
   Clarify what relevant research is currently being conducted and/or is funded to be
     conducted in the near future; and
   Clarify, and if possible, prioritize what additional scientific research may be needed in the future
     and what level of resources would be required to conduct that research and provide the results to
     inform future policy decisions regarding the regulation and education for the proper use of
     consumer fertilizers.
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007       4
The subcommittee Chair Dr. Peter Barile thanked the members participating on the subcommittee and
others assisting and provided a report to the Task Force on the results of a subcommittee conference
call that addressed each of the three charges to the subcommittee. (See Appendix # 3). He noted the
subcommittee believed there was a significant amount of research available and that these experiments
were adequate but limited in terms of application to real world conditions. He noted that he believed
that leaching losses of phosphorous raise concern over impacts on neighboring hydrologically linked
systems. The subcommittee reviewed the research work in progress supported by a FDEP multi-year
contract to IFAS, including the following fertilizer BMP-related research projects that are underway:

            o Continued assessment of experimental N & P leaching rates
            o Nitrogen leaching rates as a function of irrigation rate
            o P requirements of St. Augustine and Zoysia turf grass in experimental indoor & outdoor
              conditions
            o Impact of fertilizer application under seasonal turf dormancy
            o Nitrogen application source and timing
            o Evaluation of P soil testing kits

The Committee also reviewed the research focusing on the environmental assessment of fertilizer
mobilization into Florida’s natural ecosystems including the MACTEC report, which provides a
modeling assessment of nutrient loading, including the urban fertilizer loadings into the Wekiva River
basin, is being further supported by FDEP. The Phase II MACTEC study will assess shallow
groundwater nutrient concentrations to provide verification of modeling results. The USGS is currently
engaged in nutrient loading studies to Northwest Florida spring systems, spring shed land-use
information is being utilized to inventory nitrogen sources and their contribution to groundwater
concentrations and spring loads.

Finally, Dr. Barile noted the subcommittee recommended the following conceptual research projects be
undertaken and supported in the future:

    1. In situ or ―real-world‖ assessment of fertilizer nutrient leaching and runoff from existing urban
       residential lawns. Note: this assessment was attempted to augment the Cisar et al. (2000) ―Ft.
       Lauderdale‖ experimental study, for several residential lawns in Sarasota, but results were not
       reported.
    2. A detailed mass balance or ―box model‖ study to assess the ultimate sinks, fate and chemical
       transformations of N and P in turf, soil, and shallow groundwater systems.
    3. Consumer behavior studies to assess residential urban turf irrigation rates, actual fertilizer
       application rates, and other factors with respect to understanding urban turf management by
       consumers. Analyses may be nested in a residential subdivision approach to attain trends within
       communities in addition to statewide trends between communities across the state.

Member Q & A

   Under 3 Item #1- We should also consider additional research on ground cover, grasses and native
    plants as part of the broader picture.
   Concerned about real world- 50% of nutrient application.
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007     5
   How much is coming off lawn where no nutrients are applied?
   We should acknowledge that some landscapes don’t need fertilizer
   What leaching effects from natural native landscapes?
   Why haven’t studies been done? It is extremely difficult, challenging and expensive to monitor non
    point source pollution due to controlling for multiple variables. DEP continues to look at this.
    New technologies for sampling may offer some opportunity for such studies in the future.
   The industry looks at ―social marketing‖- i.e. consumer behavior- in terms of determining what do
    residents want.
   The Sarasota County site that was removed from the report was a side by side comparison of
    nutrient loads in two subdivisions in accordance with all the BMPs; next door is a regular
    development. Part of monitoring should get at homeowner behavior. Hoping to have 2-3 more
    sites in the near future.
   Wisconsin research- side by side. Suggesting non-fertilized lawn might provide more pollution?
   Homeowner Association bylaws need consideration for education and changes. Some provide that
    homes can only have St. Augustine grass. Large educational effort- won’t happen easily. E.g. a 1200
    home community of a member. Need to learn more about other options. How to address? Use the
    green building model?
   Erickson 2005 study? Research protocol- residential landscape model. Application rate of 6 times a
    year.
   Peter Barile reviewed a Excel chart focusing on the Lesco Turf fertilizer table as an e.g. (see
    Appendix #3)
   Measuring nitrogen leachate- large component of residential use is urea- which may be leaching and
    going off in runoff. What do we know about excess urea in surface waters.
   Studies tracing of urea in runoff as an additional source contributing to algal blooms?
   After 14 days, no detectable urea found? In terms of St. Augustine lawns.
   Research needs are ongoing- part of 5 year program. Not just St. Augustine but other turfs.
   Question- shifts to phosphorous research vs. nitrogen. IFAS letter to Task Force focuses on
    nitrogen.
   Urban turf rule- dominated by nitrogen issues.
   DACS got a recommendation- on turf needs regarding phosphorous. Accepted as appropriate
   Future research questions.
   What are research gaps?
   Research on urea application?
   Where are regions where you don’t need any phosphorous? E.g. coastal zone? Is this data
    available? Id areas where there is high phosphorous.
   What lawn care companies- doesn’t apply phosphorous? Most companies can show where
   Jerry S. will produce- basic soil map of relative amounts of phosphorous around the state.
   Research that would document or substantiate the phosphorus in the DACS rule? Rule says here’s a
    minimum and do a test for more. Research in place- to identify- and address this issue- it is in the
    study. Not easy to do but they have a research program in place.
   The urban turf rule- 0 phosphorous would be rule. One exception would be a starter fertilizer
    where phosphorous is low. Education is critical.
   Not going into existing yards now.
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007     6
   Sarasota study not reported. Didn’t have control on home lawns
   Take a look at current research and real world
   ―Low phosphorous‖ fertilizer may be a problem. It isn’t ―low‖ according to urban turf rule. That is
    correct. This is a ―starter‖ fertilizer. Need education for 0 phosphorous.
   Most of the products will change as a result of urban turf rule.

A motion was made and seconded to adopt Committee’s suggestions on future research plus additional
research on ground cover, grasses and native plants as part of the broader picture and additional studies
on urea application- tracing of urea in runoff as an additional source contributing to algal blooms?
Motion Unanimously Adopted 9-0

Next Steps and Assignments
   Peter Barile will reconvene the subcommittee and produce a new draft set of recommendations
    consistent with the Task Force motion.
   Jerry S. will produce- basic soil map of relative amounts of phosphorous around the state.
   Review of studies tracing of urea in runoff as an additional source contributing to algal blooms?

C. BRIEFING PRESENTATIONS
    1. Overview of DACS Existing Authorities Regarding Fertilizer Regulation,

John Costigan, DACS Deputy General Counsel provided the Task Force with an overview of DACS
Existing Authority relating consumer fertilizer. (See power point at
http://consensus.fsu.edu/Fertilizer-Task-Force/index.html under “Resources”

           570- ―expressly preempted to the state‖
           576- Registration and licensing
           Formulation of fertilizer; assurances you are selling what is licensed/labeled
           Registration and Labeling of Consumer Fertilizer
           Regulation- 576 045 Best management practices. Inspection, sampling and analysis. ―Plant
            nutrient- miracle gro type products.
           Cancellation, revoke suspend license.
           576.151-Prohibited acts – access to plant, etc.
           576.181 Rulemaking authority regarding composition and application rate of fertilizer.
           General grant- 570
           DACS doesn’t have authority to deal with the ultimate user but with the introduction into
            the marketplace in Florida.

    Member Q & A
       ―Agricultural‖ fertilizers? Why 576 is called this? ―Specialty‖ fertilizer in definitions (49 lbs or
        less). Enforcement rarely comes to General Counsel’s office. E.g. ―Deconing‖. Title is
        misnomer.
       Best management practices- Ag water division of DACS. Adopt by reference. DEP responsible
        for the creation of the BMP manuals. Agricultural fertilizers references. Golf courses. Specific
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007        7
        to pieces of property vs. applicators/users. Following BMPs gives you safe harbor from
        regulators.
       Ag nutrients and non point pollution.
       On the urban side- DEP combination of education and regulation. On urban side- ERP-
        incorporate by reference into permits the BMPs. ―Pointless personal pollution‖- education is
        the key.
       Ag- green industries, turf and ornamentals. Once sold to consumers, that is not agriculture.
       Findings and intent- BMP ag, industry and ―other users‖
       What $$- This was initially the nitrate bill- focusing on ground water. Expanded on sunset to
        cover surface water.
       $$- TMDL doc stamp real estate taxes, water sustainability SB 444, Doesn’t separate out- old
        ―nitrate funds‖.
       Funding 2 projects – proper amount of fertilizer for urban landscapes. Newly planted turf or
        ornamental landscapes with WMDs.
       Monitoring citrus. Funding cost share- containerized nursery. Variety. Used for education, cost
        share, research and for monitoring.
       As state budget constricts- and funding for BMPs.
       Portion of fee proscribed for homeowners and fertilizers and link with water. Increase fee
        dedicated solely towards this task force.
       Specific earmark of Doc stamps funds to DEP for non point source urban BMPs. Varies from
        year to year based on real estate sales (1/4 of 1% of collection).
       Making this pot of funding more explicit to use for education?
       DEP funds dedicated for urban. DACS funds dedicated for Ag. Also federal funding/grants
       Limited pot- demand for $$ will go up as more TMDLs go forward. Piece-mealing it presently.
       Tonnage fee- 960,000 annually DACS; doc stamps around 6 million, were up to 9 million and
        grant funds DEP used to get 9, but now at 8 million and expect those to decline. Part of EPA
        budget 319 $$- non point source. DEP must provide 40% non federal match. Patchwork of
        funding sources.
       First finding in the Task Force charge from the Fl. Legislature- acknowledges of need for better
        training and education.
       Statute proscribes the fee for this- BMP, education and incentives. Can’t go to next step
        without a proscribed funding source for this. Unless you have the funding, this is just talk.
       Rich provide listing of where funding has gone over past few years for tonnage fee? When was
        50 cents per ton in 1994. Went through sunset review. Vast proportion of funding from
        nitrogen not so much from phosphorous. Haven’t separated which funds funded what since the
        authority was identical.
       Early on 95-99- had a committee reviewing project funding. Vast majority ag projects, all
        focusing on citrus and ground water protection. After watershed restoration act- covered
        surface.
       Rich Budell to provide Summary of what projects have been funded by DACS
       Eric Livingston-provide funding information.
       Task Force recommendation regarding funding should be clear and not result in the following:
        ―You pretend to fund it, I’ll pretend to run it.‖

DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007     8
       Doc stamps vary and lots of battling over those funds (e.g. land acquisition,) tonnage fees have
        an intersection.

    2. Model Local Government Ordinance Draft

        a. Overview and Discussion of the Model Ordinance Draft

Eric Livingston and Jack Merriam provided an overview of the draft local government ordinance
including the following points (See Appendix 4):

       Draft is based on the Sarasota model
       Model format- sections and comments and guidance. Didn’t have time to provide the guidance
        such a model needs.
       Surface and ground water pollution-in the whereas clauses are important concepts
       Deed restrictions and covenants are a real problem and addressed in applicability
       Have a prohibited application period- e.g. flood watch, Restricted application period.
       Took DACS urban turf rule.
       Fertilizer free zone- required. Low maintenance zone.
       Training and licensing- applicators and companies, vehicles,

Introduction
 Will be revisiting the DEP model ordinance on Florida Friendly Lawns and Landscapes in 2008 to
    update.
Title/ Whereas
Q&A
   1st whereas- Reduce nutrient runoff to surface waters?
   5. Findings of Fact- ―Impairment or a trend toward increasing. Surface water or ground water in
    the spring.
 This section- allows for reactive or proactive approach.
 Whereas that refer to the Urban Turf Rule? Purpose of these? Based on the Sarasota ordinance.
9. Timing of Application
Q&A
   Enforcement issue- should this be none? How has this been addressed in Sarasota? Just started.
    Don’t have a police force- use existing code enforcement officers in the field to monitor
    compliance with ordinance.
   Sarasota has 0 during the restrictive application period. This has 1. Enforcement issue is the same.
    June 1- September 30.
   Newly installed landscape?
   Slow release- what kind? Available science with respect to this.
   Guidance- provide alternative nutrients to nitrogen and phosphorous.
   No science now to back up borders or low maintenance zones. Restrictions in without a scientific
    research base. The rainy season is the time for the most growth in turf.
   How will restrictive period influence the behavior. Will it encourage behaviors you don’t want.
    What is the outcome that will manifest itself. It is driving the right or wrong behavior.
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007       9
   Optimum set backs- deficiency in the science. Not a number but a continuum. Sarasota relied a
    great deal of both science and common sense. Didn’t trust the IFAS reports. Knew there were
    gaps.
 Precautionary principle- analogy to the drug industry- demonstrate it is safe before putting on the
    market. Compare with cigarette companies. Treats its environment as its child.
 Saw they were likely a contributor.
 Slow release application before rainy season. Put out in May. No fertilizer until October? Any
    difference in putting out in July. Does the least amount of damage. This might result in putting
    much of the slow release out at the same time and not dispersed over time.
 6-9 month release fertilizer. Don’t have to add just before June 1.
 An agronomist view- what does a plant need to have and when?
 What can industry do to provide a product
 Urban turf rule is limited the type an application. Restricted the amount and individual application
    and total amount of nutrient applied. Urban turf rule has factored in many of these issues already.
 Distinguish between do it yourself homeowners and lawn service companies.
 Note the do it yourself consumer data shows they do 2 applications usually earlier in the year.
 Will this lead to over fertilization.
 Crop nutrition- if you leave out during this period- feeding the grass you will lose turf.
10. Fertilizer Content and Application Rates- (Urban Turf Rule)
Q&A
   Not comfortable that DACS rule is sufficient if it means deferring for 5 years.
   What is the expected reduction in load of phosphorous and nitrogen in implementing the rule.
   15% reduction in phosphorous 25% reduction in nitrogen? Were these conservative estimates of
    reductions? Districts concerned that these are too conservative in terms of reduction. If they are
    looking at getting 70% reduction. Does DACS have a better or revised estimate?
   When all label changes made in Florida- expect a 15-20% reduction of phosphorous that goes into
    the marketplace. 25% for nitrogen. If we apply the new stuff at the right time, that will determine
    what the overall reduction is. Since don’t deal with use. If less in the bag will go into the
    environment.
   This isn’t the only or even best tool for load reduction.
   DACS working on getting an accurate representation on what urban turf use has been. Actual
    amount going into turf is less than we initially thought. Hope to have finished by December
    meeting.
   In future companies should report what is sold by turf label by counties.
   This won’t clean up water ways. This was Sarasota counties 16th ordinance on water quality issue.
   ―Do not apply near water‖ in DACS urban turf rule. Quantified in ordinance what was qualified in
    the DACS ordinance.
   Have a chart for shrubs and ground covers. They may need less fertilization than lawns. Don’t want
    to mislead.
   Sarasota palm growers- this is an outstanding issue in Sarasota.
   Recommend dealt with in the future.
   Application to ―turf and/or landscape plants‖ in definitions.


DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007    10
  Include this as a recommendation. Different strategies and possibly different rules and guidelines
   may be needed.
 Is this a research issue? Reference a quick summary from IFAS. Part of the education process
   should direct people to making this distinction.
Fertilizer Free Zones and Low Maintenance Zones
Q&A
  Clarify by example what is meant here for the low maintenance zones.
  Concern about the decay in the health of the lawn in these zones.
  Nutrients still move towards. Posted 10 will likely to get 7 ½ . BMPs often address this issue.
   Fertilizer free zones where water runs through
 Low impact development standards get at this.
 Do golf courses apply during rainy season? BMPs. What is the consistency between those 2
   approaches. Athletic fields- e.g. no summer fertilizer would affect health of the turf in the Fall.
Grass Clippings
Q&A
 ―Intentionally or accidentally?‖ Consider deleting ―accidentally‖
Training and Certification
Q&A
  Certification program- Florida Nursery Growers and Landscape Association programs- BMP
   certification standards. Industry credentialing programs- embrace and broaden scope of educational
   delivery. Spread burden or cost.
 Get a copy of the FNGLA Certified Horticulture Professional – incorporated into standards are
   BMP and other professional standards. Area for fertilizer application.
 DACS has a containerized nursery production facilities BMPs
Enforcement
Q&A
   Leave this to local government? Delete from next draft

    b. Next Steps/Assignments on Model Ordinance Review and Refinement

   Each Task Force member will review a revised version of the ordinance and indicate what provisions
    present a ―deal breaker‖ or are unacceptable. And provide to the facilitators ways to make that provision
    more acceptable.
   IFAS have comparable number for shrubs and landscapes? Jerry Sartain will report on what is
    available as a summary reference from IFAS.
   Rich Budell will provide a guideline as to what the impact the DACS Turf Rule on the formulations
    themselves

    c. Adopting Legislation for the Local Government Model Ordinance

Discussion of Implications for implementation of the ordinance
   In Gainesville agreed on a preliminary statement that called for the statewide standards that all local
    governments would need to adopt by ordinance?
   Don’t like the idea of a mandate to local governments. Don’t think this will fly in the legislature
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007       11
    Should not have a state mandatory requirement that every city and county have the ordinance. This
     will not be supported by FAC and FLC.
    Instead, should include standardized criteria if a local government wants to adopt.
    Guidelines that regulate statewide use, enforcement and compliance of a fertilizer rule or statute.
    For those counties and cities that adopt an ordinance- here are the guidelines you must use as a
     minimum?
    Defer to local governments?
    Statewide guidelines related to formulations and use rates are already covered by the- DACS rule.
    Criteria needed to developing stricter standards than called for in the model ordinance?
    If a local government adopts a model ordnance, follow the model. If there is a desire to create a
     more stringent set of requirements

The members reviewed the November 2 statements and proposed, refined and adopted the following
statements:

c. 1. Adopt a state law including standards based on three (3) state regions providing for amendments
to the a model ordinance for municipalities and counties concerning the use of nonagricultural
fertilizer for use by local governments who choose to adopt an ordinance.
where it can be demonstrated based on sound science that site specific conditions require modifications
to ensure protection of either ground or surface waters. State requirements may vary based on Florida’s
three (3) regions as defined in the DACS fertilizer labeling rule.

                  4=acceptable    3= minor reservations   2=major               1= not acceptable
                                                          reservations
11-14 Ranking           6                   3                      0                      0

Nov. 14 - Minor Reservation Comments
 Lack of criteria gives pause
 As the model is still in development, not clear on what we are ranking.
 ―Stringent‖? What does this mean? What about an additional provisions – suggest adding ―adopt
   additional or more stringent‖

2. Local Government may can adopt additional or more stringent provisions to the model ordinance
provided the local government can demonstrate:

    They have verified impaired waters and are facing possible TMDL requirements (under state and
     federal laws)
    Harm to human health or harm to the environment that warrants additional consumer fertilizer
     requirements.
    That they will improve water quality standards and prevent future impacts of consumer
     fertilizers on the environment.

                  4=acceptable    3= minor reservations   2=major               1= not acceptable
                                                          reservations
Initial Ranking         5                   4

DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007         12
Nov 14 Comments
 More reactive than proactive. Need an additional one that is anticipatory.
 Problem with setting out criteria. Rely on model ordinance. Forget about criteria?
 What is the authority of model ordinance adopted in law?
 ―Local governments can adopt additional more stringent provisions provided the local
   governments can demonstrate… 3 bullets.

3. The Task Force supports the use of the DACS Urban Turf rule to serve as the statewide guidelines
governing nonagricultural fertilizer use rates, formulations, and applications with attention to the
geographic regions identified in rule 5E-1.003, Florida Administrative Code

November 14 Comments
 Not comfortable that DACS rule is sufficient if it means deferring for 5 years.
 What is the expected reduction in load of phosphorous and nitrogen in implementing the rule.
 15% reduction in phosphorous 25% reduction in nitrogen? Were these conservative estimates of
   reductions? Districts concerned that these are too conservative in terms of reduction. If they are
   looking at getting 70% reduction. Does DACS have a better or revised estimate?
 When all label changes made in Florida- expect a 15-20% reduction of phosphorous that goes into
   the marketplace. 25% for nitrogen. If we apply the new stuff at the right time, that will determine
   what the overall reduction is. Since don’t deal with use. If less in the bag will go into the
   environment.
 This isn’t the only or even best tool for load reduction.
 Parties in the Turf Rule process- DACS has authority in the urban turf rule? Yes. If DACS wanted
   to go further, would have authority. Determining the composition ―Detrimental to agriculture,
   public health or the environment.‖ Debate on the urban turf rule was over what the science
   revealed what the amount should be. This was more of a factual vs. a legal question relating to
   DACS authority.
 Do you need any more legal authority to make sure? Would always welcome additional language
   and clear authority.
 When DACS talked about the urban turf rule spoke of the rates based on regions in the state.
   Statute doesn’t allow DACS to take action against a user violating the label- e.g. using more.
   Intention of legislation was to protect consumers to get what they are paying for. DACS
   responsibility that they are not getting more than they are supposed to get re nitrogen and
   phosphorous. Now there is an upper and lower level.

    3. Turf Applicators Certification Proposal- Steve Dwinell, DACS Assistant Director, Division of
       Agriculture Environmental Services

Steve Dwinell, Assistant Director, DACS Division of Agriculture Environmental Services, made a
presentation to the Task Force on the existing DACS ―Limited Commercial Landscape Maintenance
Certification‖ (LMP) (See power point at http://consensus.fsu.edu/Fertilizer-Task-Force/index.html under
―Resources‖), offering the following comments:

   DACS coming to this for a number of years.
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007     13
   Green Industries BMPs
   Landscape maintenance- certification for professionals for pesticides. Licensed pest control
    company can apply to lawns.
   50% landscape maintenance folks apply pesticides.
   Take existing program- combine with need for the fertilizer training.
   Tied to individual
   Benefits of building on existing certification program.

Q&A
 Not allowing pesticides application to turf.
 They apply fertilizers now.
 20-30,000 small businesses serving home owners. They don’t have the proper training to apply
  pesticides. DACS has been aggressive in fines in illegal use of pesticide.
 Training and tested and certified. Agency authority to enforce.
 482 scope now allows to apply fertilizers and not weed and feed.
 Taking the current training and refocusing it more on fertilizers practices.
 Can’t get to the guy in the truck applying fertilizers only in this program.
 If you wanted to have the applicator show certificate to distributor, you’d have to get statutory
  change. Not a new certification, just additional training and testing.
 ―Watershed management team‖- industry, local government, WMD, DEP DACS. This has a lot of
  merit. Commercial industry fertilizer applicators- green industry program. License cards.
 About ½ apply both pesticides and fertilizers makes sense to combine.
 People doing the mow and blow or just fertilizers. That’s where local ordinances come into play.
 Model ordinance- local government, may choose to require they become a limited certificate holder.
  Forces into existing training program. Get an occupational license, sticker.
 Can you delegate to non-certified person? No. Everyone would have to be done.
 Fertilization certificate. Statutory authority extends only to pesticide applicator.
 Points out- authority over individual who only applies fertilizer 482 is where you would make the
  change.
 What is the logic- applying pest control to the lawn vs. ornamental? This was how the legislature
  determined to address it.

Motions on Statements Following the Presentation

Endorse the Combined Training Program (LCM) and modify the existing DACS training program to
include fertilizer BMPs and add BMPs and updates to continuing education requirements.
9-0 unanimous.
Comments after motion
 Expansion in existing training to add fertilizer- step in right direction.
 Sarasota embraced Green Industry BMP standards- bulk of training followed that
 How to mesh the DACS and DEP programs together?



DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007    14
Modify chapter 482 to authorized DACS to require limited certification for those who only
applying fertilizer commercially.
9-0 unanimous.
Comments after the motion
 Is 6 hours enough- with 4 hours continuing? Started with 8 but found people dropped out by end of day.

    4. Consumer Education strategies, Rich Martinez

Rich Martinez reviewed with the Task Force a series of documents and two audio public service
announcements regarding consumer education best practices. (See Appendix #5)

   Consumer education. Direct people to good products.
   Opportunity is to address other stuff- simple, positive (what to do, not what not to do) and
    translated to good advice
   Consensus on good advice- 7 tips
   Product that doesn’t have a spreader setting should be eliminated from use on lawn.
   Buy the amount they need. Lawns growing when you are mowing it. If not it is not growing there
    will be no mowing.
   Reviewed 7 best practices. (See appendix #5)
   E.g. don’t need a soil test. Use according to label directions.
   Partnerships for the communications. Lawn care stewardship. Place add where they will see
    routinely.
   Brochures- 2 million produced and distributed
   Public service announcements developed (demonstrated at the meeting- see (See audio files at
    http://consensus.fsu.edu/Fertilizer-Task-Force/index.html under ―Resources‖)
   Involve retailers
   Put messages on the utility envelope. Simple, ubiquitous.
   Bill boards are effective as well.
   By forming partnerships- resources can be generated to support the campaign.
   30 years of work dealing withy education on ―pointless personal solution‖ supported Rich’s
    comments: Simple messages. Gardening in a minute. Radio, billboard.
   Message to home owner- applies their own fertilizer.
   More is not better. Read these labels. If you don’t and apply improperly then
   Simple statement on why they should read the label- apply according to label because excess
    nutrients harm the environment
   Let’s prevent and not clean up at great cost later- ounce of prevention and pound of cure
   Fall is best time for next spring – Labor Day and Halloween.
   Difference in behavior- homeowners don’t support over use. Get him to put it on right time, right
    way.
   This will be in addition to the green industry- in the business.
   Extension service- Florida friendly landscaping- lawn maintenance.
   Dr. Nell- Florida friendly landscaping.

DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007   15
   Gardening in a minute 120 words- 17 counties- looking to go statewide with a website to back it up.
    Connecting all of these efforts: master gardeners program, Florida yards and neighborhoods.
    Partnering with DEP, IFAS, WMDs, to combine. Would like to go statewide.
   Task Force embrace and support with resources implementing the model being developed by IFAS
    and partners statewide.
   Initially endorse the 7 best practices for lawn care elements, modified to be Florida specific along
    with reasons why, to be included in our report to legislature as to the message a statewide
    homeowner education public outreach program should include.
   Amend the motion to include the 5 points-
   Note the reasons why excessive nutrients bad for system.
   ―No fertilizer‖ should be said somewhere.
   Avoid water bodies.
   No mention of philosophy regarding planting in the right place.
   Low to no phosphorous
   The right plants in the right place.
   IFAS Input included on the ultimate draft
   Give to IFAS following this meeting.

Consumer Homeowner Education Proposal

   Endorse the 7 best practices for lawn care elements as starting point to be modified and made
    Florida specific and:
         Provide the reasons why consumer should follow
         Preface the best practices with ―If you choose to fertilize…‖
         Avoid water bodies in applying fertilizer
         Look for low to no phosphorous in consumer fertilizers
         ―Right plants in the right place‖

   Task Force supports implementing the model being developed by IFAS and partners statewide and
    providing resources to do so.

Motion to adopt: 9-0.

D. PUBLIC COMMENTS

Below is a brief summary of public comments offered at the Task Force meeting. See Appendix #6
for written public comments.

Mayor Mick Denhaun, Mayor of Sanibel and SWFRPC Chair of the Water Quality Subcommittee
   Fertilizer not a big part of water quality problem?
   Focused on waste water treatment, package treatment, sewage treatment, stormwater and
      consumer fertilizers
   Economic issue spurred the focus- red tide.

DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007    16
       Dr. Brian LaPointe, working on red algae research. Convinced the subcommittee of a link
        between nitrogen and red algae.
       Resolution of the RPC. Lee County and Sarasota. Suggestion of Jerry Brooks. Asked IFAS,
        DEP SWFWMD, DACS, local government. Carefully reviewed by scientific peers.
       Encouraged by progress being made.
       Limiting both nitrogen and phosphorous. And slow release.
       More important- prohibiting application of phosphrous in rainy season. Buffer zones and
        emphasis on public education. Sanibel put together DVD on lawn care- 6-7 minute. Every
        citizen in Sarasota County will have a copy of it. Will make available to Task Force.

Mike Holsinger, Sarasota.

       Red drift algae and red tide means I don’t walk as much as used to.
       #8 model ordinance during rainy season. Slow release. No rationale to apply during rainy
        season.
       Factor in misapplication so assume these are pollution events. Better not to apply during rainy
        season. Nitrogen is taken up more in rainy season. 50% or more of slow release should be
        justified based on site conditions? Why restricted?
       11- fertilizer free zone- 10 foot zone. Why any application vs. 1 time. Put plants in that don’t
        require fertilizer.
       Education- homeowners aren’t the main problem. Where is it going? Tripled. Professional
        applicators in highly managed landscapes. Target education to them. Model contract- Sarasota
        county. Promote slow release and alternative ground covers.
       DACS training program. 50,000 people will need this training on fertilizers. 1-2 hours of
        fertilizer training. Offer it on line. Big audience.

Sanford Simon, United Industries.
    Uniform standards should be based on sound science
    Consumer education is important and the Task Force is heading in the right direction.
    The state ordinance concept discussed is also a good direction.
    Sarasota ordinance as the basis for the model ordinance. Would urge the Task Force touse the
       DEP model ordinance as the starting point not the Sarasota ordinance.

Jim Skilling, RISE
    Specialty fertilizer not a significant contributor to nutrients.
    4 years of data on ban of phosphate in Minnesota. No documented water quality difference.
    Needs uniformity for smooth flow of commerce.
    If you allow more rigorous standards- document science basis and actual harm from the use of
       specialty fertilizers. Dept of Ag report.
    Has the Minnesota legislature received report? Not well publicized. Build up of phosphorous in
       soil taking a time to release.
    Turf not receiving phosphate within 2 years

Chris Weible, Scotts Company
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007      17
       Elephant in the room. 6 million home lawn in the state? Magnitude of issue.
       40% of phosphate leaches to water? Need to make sure info we have is good. 10% slope no
        phosphate runoff.

Erica Santella, Tru Green & FPAA
    Don’t ignore other aspects of the home landscape picture
    Showed picture of the ―edge‖
    Some local governments in the southwest are rushing to pass ordinances before January 1 in
       advance of the Task Force report to the Legislature.

Bill Wirt, TruGreen
     Truck containment
     Closed season for fertilizer would be a challenge as a business owner.
     Turf likes to eat in the summer time. Research says it is okay to eat in rainy season. Golf and
       athletic fields can why not home lawns.
     Doesn’t make sense that can’t deliver green in rainy season.
     HOAs want green lawns in the rainy seasons. Big challenge for their industry.

Barry Troutman, Valley Crest
    Total landscape design company.
    Comments on the Sarasota ordinance- table shouldn’t be in the model ordinance. Refer to
       BMPs. Don’t have to rewrite ordinances. Change the BMP only.
    Effect on training. 17 local ordinances. Standardize this to support the education. Statewide
       certification. A local government should give a page of exemptions.
    Limiting no phosphate fertilizer. Fertilizer buffer zone should be the same throughout the state.
       Prefer BMP #. 3 feet with deflector shield. 10 feet without.

Stuart DeCew, Sierra Club
    Pleased with the discussion. Different views of the goal Grow more seagrass vs. turf.
    Recommendations from several Florida environmental organizations included in the members
       packets. 10 recommendations.
    The Label is critical- provide the ―why.‖ Explicit on the bag that this can degrade water quality.
    Nitrogen fertilizer problem globally. Need a comprehensive and inclusive way. Large challenge.
       In a decade grew from 170 to 500,000 tons. Actions are providing a roadmap for other states in
       the southeast.
    The Task Force and its subcommittee might be interested in a ―White paper‖ Lee County has
       developed regarding their review of science and a side by side comparison of several local
       ordinances, resolutions and standards.

Don Cheney, Healthy Gulf Coalition.
   Grew up on Sarasota Bay. Could eat seafood on the bay. Cant each shell fish.
   Out on the bay sailing and fishing.
   Algae blooms on the bay tied to nutrients and nitrogen. Red drift algae. Siesta Key, county
     spends money to remove.
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007    18
       FMRI website report on algae bloom
       Do the right thing for our waters in Florida. Need to start with something.
       Adopt the Sarasota County Rule

Mary Hartney, FFAA.
   Mfg, dealers and distributors of fertilizer and pesticides.
   Like to see task force come out with simple, fair and equitable.
   Right product, right rate, right place right time
   BMPs today- keep off driveways, don’t apply to water, leave clippings on.
   Apply only if 50% or less rainfall in the next day.
   Supportive of regulation of agronomics of plants. Please emphasize the positive benefits of
      fertilizers. Paired up with adverse consequences when not used properly.
   Contribute to property value and appearance.
   Make science based and consistent.
   How much nitrogen used in recent years. Using fertilizers to feed the world. Without fertilizers
      we would have 2 billion more mouths than we can feed.

Terril Nell, IFAS
    Clarifying statements- photo north of Bradenton. In Florida. Lawn associated with Florida
       friendly landscapes
    6 million acres of home lawn? 1992 study- economic. Turf grass, green space and other open
       areas.
    Education efforts need to have a consistent approach
    Even with steamlined effort- rethink the names for the commercial side.
    Messages on drought management in landscape. Do this statewide with a unified message-
       under the IFAS.

E. NEXT MEETING AND ASSIGNMENTS

The Chair thanked members for their hard work during today’s meeting. He noted we would be
meeting on December 17 in Apopka for the Task Force’s 5th meeting. He asked members to send to
the facilitators their thoughts on ―deal breakers‖ in regards to the model local government ordinance
and suggestions on what could be done. He also noted the Task Force would have an early point
for public comments as well as a review of all public comments received to date at the meetings, in
writing and online.

The facilitator noted there were several assignments and at the next meeting we would take up
funding issues, follow up on the science recommendations, a review and refinement of the model
ordinance, a review of the final consumer education recommendations and extended public
comments on the drafts to date.

The Task Force adjourned at
   

DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007    19
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007   20
                                                   Appendix # 1

                   Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
                        Florida Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV
                                      November 14, 2007
                                Tallahassee, Florida
                          Conner Administration Building
           3125 Conner Boulevard—Tallahassee, Florida 32399; 850.488.3731
               Note: All Agenda Times—Including Public Comment and Adjournment—
                                      Are Subject to Change

                                              Meeting Objectives

   To Approve Regular Procedural Topics (Agenda, Report, and Workplan Schedule)
   To Hear Reports and Updates on Task Force Assigned Issues
   To Review Consumer Fertilizer Regulation, Management Strategies and Uses Options
   To Hear/Discuss Topical Presentations Related to Key Task Force Issues
   To Identify Additional Key Issues Regarding Refinements for Regulation, Management Strategies
    and Use of Consumer Fertilizers
   To Identify Additional Options for Addressing Key Issues
   To Discuss and Evaluate Level of Acceptability for Proposed Options
   To Identify Needed Next Steps and Agenda Items for Next Meeting
   To Receive Public Comment on Task Force’s Work Product to Date

                                                Meeting Agenda
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
8:30            Welcome and Opening
8:35            Agenda Review and Approval
8:40            Approval of the November 2, 2007 Facilitator’s Summary Report
8:45            Overview of DACS Existing Authorities Regarding Fertilizer Regulation
9:00            Research Subcommittee Status Report and Draft Recommendations for Future
                Research and Studies Needs
9:40            DACS Rule/Sarasota County/SWFRPC Application Rates Comparison
9:50            Review and Discuss Draft Model Ordinance—DEP/Sarasota County Presentation
                (Eric Livingston and Jack Merriam)
10:10           Question and Answer Session, and Discussion of Presentation

DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007   21
10:30           Break
10:45           Draft Model Ordinance Discussion—Continued
11:00           Review and Discuss Possible Criteria for Local Government Strengthening of State
                Baseline Requirements
12:00           Lunch—Working Lunch On Campus
12:30           Review and Discuss Draft State Certification for Fertilizer Application—DACS
                Presentation Regarding Proper Use (Andy Rackley and/or DACS Designee)
1:00            Question and Answer Session, and Discussion of Presentation
1:30            Review and Discuss Draft Proposal for Training and Education on Proper Use—
                Industry Presentation (Rich Martinez and/or Industry Designee)
2:00            Question and Answer Session, and Discussion of Presentation
2:30            Overview of Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Delivery and Meeting Schedule
2:40            Next Steps and Agenda Items for Next Meeting
                Next meeting agenda items, needed information/presentations, location, and date
2:45            Recess
3:00            Public Comment and Input on Task Force’s Work Product to Date
4:30            Adjourn

Contact Information: Jeff Blair; 850.644.6320; jblair@fsu.edu ; http://consensus.fsu.edu
                       Bob Jones; 850.644.6320; rmjones@fsu.edu
Project Webpage: http://consensus.fsu.edu/fertilizer-task-force/index.html


Task Force Members                 Representation
Mayor Jay Arend                    Florida League of Cities, Inc.
Senator David Aronberg             Florida Senate
Peter John Barile                  Environmental Community
Jerry Brooks                       Department of Environmental Protection
Richard Budell                DACS Office of Agricultural Water Policy
Casey Fitzgerald (Vice-chair)      Water Management Districts
Richard Martinez                   National Fertilizer Industry
Representative Bryan Nelson        Florida House of Representatives
Ron Olson                          Florida-Based Fertilizer Industry
Andy Rackley (Chair)               Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
Jerry Sartain                      UF Institute for Food and Agricultural Sciences
Karen Taylor                       Registered Landscape Architect
Commissioner Jon Thaxton           Florida Association of Counties




DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007    22
            Appendix # 2 November 14 Task Force Meeting Evaluation Summary
                        Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
                               Florida Consumer Fertilizer Task Force
                          INSTRUCTIONS TO TASK FORCE MEMBERS:
PLEASE USE A 0 TO 10 RATING SCALE WHERE A 0 MEANS TOTALLY DISAGREE AND A 10 MEANS
TOTALLY AGREE. PLEASE PLACE YOUR RATING IN THE SPACE TO THE LEFT OF EACH QUESTION

1. Please assess the overall meeting.
8.29    The background information was very useful.
8.29    The agenda packet was very useful.
8.29    The objectives for the meeting were stated at the outset.
8.43    Overall, the objectives of the meeting were fully achieved.
8.14    Research Subcommittee Status Report and Draft Recommendations.
7.71    Review and Discussion of Draft Model Ordinance.
7.00    Review and Discussion of Possible Criteria for Local Government Strengthening.
8.57    Review and Discussion of Draft State Certification for Fertilizer Application.
8.57    Review and Discussion of Draft Proposal for Training and Education on Proper Use.
7.50    Identification of Additional Key Issues for Discussion and Evaluation.
7.50    Identification, Evaluation and Acceptability Ranking of Options.
8.17    Next Steps and Agenda Items For Next Meeting.

2. Please tell us how well the facilitator helped the participants engage in the meeting.
8.71 The participants followed the direction of the facilitators.
9.29 The facilitators made sure the concerns of all participants were heard.
8.86 The facilitators helped us arrange our time well.
8.57 Participant input was documented accurately.

3. What is your level of satisfaction with the meeting?
8.43    Overall, I am very satisfied with the meeting.
8.86    I was very satisfied with the services provided by the facilitators.
8.43    I am satisfied with the outcome of the meeting.

4. What progress did you make?
8.86    I know what the next steps following this meeting will be.
8.86    I know who is responsible for the next steps.

 5. Do you have any other comments that you would like to add? We are very interested in
your comments. Please use the back of this page.
     Need more follow-up between meetings.




DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007   23
                                                   Appendix #3
                         Report of the Consumer Fertilizer Task Force
                                     Science Subcommittee
                          Teleconference Meeting- November 9, 2007
                                        by: Peter J. Barile, Ph.D., Chair


Meeting participants: Ed Lowe, Rob Mattson (SJRWMD), Steve Kelly (Scotts, Inc.), Eric
Livingston, Mike Thomas (FDEP), Eberhard Roeder (FDOH), Peter Barile (Environ. Comm.)

Subcommittee members were provided with technical documents on the Task Force web site, as
well as hard copies of 42 technical documents provided by the UFL- IFAS Environmental
Horticultural program. With respect to the information provided, formal comment was solicited by
members on the following questions.

1) What is your perspective on the quality, and quantity of information available to date on: a) the capacity of urban
turf to attenuate the application of fertilizer nutrients, and b) the mobilization of urban fertilizer into Florida's
natural ecosystems. What conclusions can be made at this point?

2) What information is currently being collected that may further help our understanding of 1a and 1b.

3) Based upon the existing available body of information and the present research activities identified by this
subcommittee, what research questions remain, what research can and should be supported to better understand and
clarify the importance and magnitude of processes in 1a and 1b.

Summary of Comments

Question 1a & 1b

Members were initially asked to share perspectives on questions 1a & 1b. There was a general
impression by the majority of the members that there is a significant amount of technical research
reports available (much of it from the golf course literature) on the capacity of turf to attenuate
fertilizer application in experimental conditions. Members from the fertilizer industry, the
SJRWMD and the Env. Comm. agreed that although these experiments were adequate to assess the
fertilizer attenuation capacity of mature or maturing turf in optimal experimental conditions, there
are several limitations to the application of these results to ―real world‖ conditions. These
limitations include: 1) the suggestion by IFAS publications that the high efficiencies for nitrogen
attenuation by turf become decoupled with elevated irrigation, and excessive rainfall events, which
are endemic to FL; 2) While the high attenuation efficiency of St. Augustine turf grass to assimilate
fertilizer nitrogen (~2% loss as leachate) has been reported, exhaustively, these rates apparently do
not hold comparably for the ability of St. Augustine turf grass to attenuate phosphorus. The IFAS
peer-reviewed research article, Erickson et al. (2005), as supplied in our IFAS technical packet,
reported that of the 2.6 kg P/ha were applied to St. Augustine turf treatment bi-monthly over the 45
month study (total= 58.5 kg/ha), while 22.9 kg/ha of this applied P was lost as leachate, which is a
~ 40% leaching rate for P. Erickson et al. (2005) reported that the ―leaching losses of P were
high enough to raise concerns over ecological impacts on neighboring hydrologically linked
systems… such as the Everglades... because of their sensitivity to nutrient additions‖ In the
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007                    24
IFAS research report by Sartain and Kruse (2001), the authors pointed out that ―In general,
phosphorus does not induce the visible response that is observed with the application of
nitrogen materials, and… one should only apply P when it is recommended based on a soil
test.‖
3) It was also noted by the subcommittee that ecological theory does not support the notion that
high nitrogen attenuation rates reported for maturing St. Augustine grass (e.g. Erickson et al. 2001,
and others) would hold for turf that has exceeded peak aerial and subsurface biomass.

Question 2:
To achieve our objective of proposing future research projects on turf grass performance with
respect to fertilizer applications we were provided with present research activities on Environmental
Horticultural turf research by IFAS, and continued research on the mobilization of urban fertilizer
nitrogen in the Wekiva River Basin by SJRWMD and FDEP.

Environmental Horticultural turf research summary-
Per FDEP contract to IFAS, the following fertilizer BMP-related research projects are underway:

            o Continued assessment of experimental N & P leaching rates
            o Nitrogen leaching rates as a function of irrigation rate
            o P requirements of St. Augustine and Zoysia turf grass in experimental indoor &
              outdoor conditions
            o Impact of fertilizer application under seasonal turf dormancy
            o Nitrogen application source and timing
            o Evaluation of P soil testing kits

Environmental assessment of fertilizer mobilization into FL natural ecosystems-
The MACTEC report, which provides a modeling assessment of nutrient loading, including the
urban fertilizer loadings into the Wekiva River basin, is being further supported by FDEP. The
Phase II MACTEC study will assess shallow groundwater nutrient concentrations to provide
verification of modeling results. The USGS is currently engaged in nutrient loading studies to NW
Florida spring systems, spring shed land-use information is being utilized to inventory nitrogen
sources and their contribution to groundwater concentrations and spring loads.

Question 3:
Based upon the existing technical information existing research, the subcommittee recommended
the following conceptual research projects:

1. In situ or ―real-world‖ assessment of fertilizer nutrient leaching and runoff from existing urban
residential lawns. Note: this assessment was attempted to augment the Cisar et al. (2000) ―Ft.
Lauderdale‖ experimental study, for several residential lawns in Sarasota, but results were not
reported.
2. A detailed mass balance or ―box model‖ study to assess the ultimate sinks, fate and chemical
transformations of N and P in turf, soil, and shallow groundwater systems.
3. Consumer behavior studies to assess residential urban turf irrigation rates, actual fertilizer
application rates, and other factors with respect to understanding urban turf management by
consumers. Analyses may be nested in a residential subdivision approach to attain trends within
communities in addition to statewide trends between communities across the state.

DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007     25
                                                                                                                                                     Max. P
                             bag      Coverage x                                                                                      Max. N         apps./
Product name                 weight   1000sf               N    P              K                N lb/1000sf         P lb/1000sf     apps./ yr.*       yr.**
Scott's Bonus S Max            42.3          10            26   2              9             1.0998             0.0846              5.45553737    5.910165485
Scott's Bonus S               20.69           5            29   3              4             1.20002            0.12414             4.999916668   4.027710649
Scott's Southern TB           38.47          10            26   2              13            1.00022            0.07694             5.99868029    6.498570315
Turf Gro weed n feed             50          20       16        4              8             0.4                0.1                 15            5
Sta Green lawn food              48          15            29   2              5             0.928              0.064               6.465517241   7.8125
Sta Green Bahia                  16           4            24   6              12            0.96               0.24                4.166666667   2.083333333
Scott's Summertime            13.35           5            28   0              8             0.7476             0                   8.025682183   N/A
Turf Gro LF                      50          12            24   5              11            1                  0.208333333         6             2.4
Sta Green weed n feed            14           5            28   2              4             0.784              0.056               7.653061224   8.928571429
Scott's starter               17.78           5            20   27             5             0.7112             0.96012             8.436445444   0.520768237
Sunniland rite green             50           2            6    6              6             1.5                1.5                 4             0.333333333
Milorganite                      40          2.5           6    2              0             0.96               0.32                6.25          1.5625
Sunniland Lawn n garden          40           4            16   4              8             1.6                0.4                 3.75          1.25
Sunniland Lawn n garden          40           4            6    6              6             0.6                0.6                 10            0.833333333
Turf Gro                         50           4            16   4              8             2                  0.5                 3             1
Vigro ultimate                   48          15            29   3              4             0.928              0.096               6.465517241   5.208333333
lesco tf                         46          12            26   2              11            0.996666667        0.076666667         6.02006689    6.52173913
lesco tf                         50          7.5           15   0              15            1                  0                   6             N/A
Vigro all purpose                40          15            6    6              6             0.16               0.16                37.5          3.125
Vigro all purpose                40           4            10   10             10            1                  1                   6             0.5
Scott's organic choice         29.1           4            11   2              2             0.80025            0.1455              7.497656982   3.436426117
lesco tf                         50           5            16   4              8             1.6                0.4                 3.75          1.25
lesco tf st/a                    50           8            17   2              11            1.0625             0.125               5.647058824   4
Vigro Bahia                      16           5            28   3              3             0.896              0.096               4.464285714   5.208333333
Vigro w/f st/a                   20           5            29   3              5             1.16               0.12                5.172413793   4.166666667


                                                                              For applications / yr. permitted under the urban turf rule
                                                                              * 6 lbs. N / yr. for St. Augustine, 4 lbs. N / yr. for
                                                                              Bahia

                                                                     ** 0.5 lbs. P04 / yr.



    DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007               26
                 Appendix #4 First Draft Model Local Government Ordinance
                             Eric Livingston and Jack Merriam

                                          INTRODUCTION

The attached model Fertilizer Use ordinance is another tool to reduce sources of nutrients coming
from urban landscapes to reduce the impact of nutrients on Florida’s surface and ground waters.
However, restricting fertilizer use by itself will not minimize the impacts of nutrients from urban
landscapes. Local governments are advised they should also review their existing Land
Development Regulations to assure they promote ―Low Impact Design‖, which minimizes clearing
of natural vegetation and the compaction of urban soils. A Model Springs Protection Code is being
developed by DCA, DEP, and other stakeholders that will include specific Land Development
Regulation recommendations that promote Low Impact Design. This Model Code will be available
in 2008.

Additionally, landscape design is a major determinant in the amount of fertilizer and irrigation that is
needed to maintain healthy urban landscapes and minimize adverse impacts on water resources. A
model Landscape Ordinance entitled ―Guidelines for Model Ordinance Language for Protection of
Water Quality and Quantity Using Florida Friendly Lawns and Landscapes‖ was developed by a
group of agencies, industries, and interest groups over a two year period. It is fundamentally an
adaptation of earlier water conservation ordinances revised to include water quality protections for
compliance with TMDL and NPDES requirements. The language focuses on continuing education
of lawn care and landscape professionals, proper planning and oversight during development and
construction, and the use of best management practices, including the Florida Yards and
Neighborhoods Program. This model ordinance may be downloaded from:
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/nonpoint/pubs.htm#Model%20Ordinances.

Finally, the 2004 Florida Legislature directed Florida’s water management districts to work with
interested parties to develop landscape irrigation and Florida-Friendly design standards for new
construction (section 373.228, F.S.). Local governments are to use the standards and guidelines
when developing landscape irrigation and Florida-Friendly ordinances. The Committee on
Landscape Irrigation and Florida-Friendly Design Standards convened and developed the standards.
They are published in a booklet called Landscape Irrigation and Florida Friendly Design Standards
(December 2006). This document can be downloaded from:
http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/waterpolicy/land_irr.htm



                             MODEL ORDINANCE NO. 20XX -000

          FLORIDA FRIENDLY FERTILIZER USE ON URBAN LANDSCAPES
                           MODEL ORDINANCE

    1. TITLE

        AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE USE OF FERTILIZERS
        CONTAINING    NITROGEN    AND/OR    PHOSPHORUS   WITHIN
        (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY); ESTABLISHING FINDINGS OF FACT;
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007       27
        PROVIDING SHORT TITLE; PROVIDING PURPOSE AND INTENT;
        PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY
        WITHIN UNINCORPORATED (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) BUT
        ALLOWING MUNICIPALITIES TO ADOPT SAME PROVISIONS;
        PROVIDING FOR TIMING OF FERTILIZER APPLICATION; SPECIFYING
        FERTILIZER CONTENT AND APPLICATION RATE; PROHIBITING
        FERTILIZER ON IMPERVIOUS SURFACES; REQUIRING FERTILIZER-
        FREE ZONES; REQUIRING LOW MAINTENANCE ZONES; SPECIFYING
        MODE OF APPLICATION; SPECIFYING MANAGEMENT OF GRASS
        CLIPPINGS AND VEGETATIVE MATERIAL; PROVIDING FOR
        EXEMPTIONS; REQUIRING TRAINING AND LICENSING OF
        COMMERCIAL APPLICATORS; PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT AND
        PENALTY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR
        SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, INCLUDING
        AN IMPLEMENTATION PERIOD.

2. WHEREAS FINDINGS OF FACT

    WHEREAS, this ordinance is part of a multi-pronged effort by (MUNICIPALITY /
COUNTY) to reduce nutrient runoff to surface waters and leaching into ground water through such
policies as, but not limited to, stormwater management, water conservation, conversion from septic
systems to central sewage treatment, public education, and development standards as set forth in the
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Land Development Regulations; and

    WHEREAS, the detrimental effects of nutrient-laden runoff and leaching are magnified in a
coastal/lake/springshed community such as (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), due to the proximity
of stormwater and drainage conveyances to coastal/surface/ground waters; and

     WHEREAS, leaching and runoff of nutrients from improper or excess fertilization and/or
irrigation practices can contribute to nitrogen and phosphorus pollution in the
(MUNICIPALITY/COUNTY) stormwater and drainage conveyances, springs, and other natural
water bodies; and

    WHEREAS, nutrient-laden leaching and runoff foster plant and algae growth; and

    WHEREAS, nitrogen and phosphorus pollution in the (MUNICIPALITY/COUNTY)
stormwater and drainage conveyances, and natural water bodies leads to the overgrowth of
vegetation in these water bodies; and

    WHEREAS, the quality of our bays, estuaries, springs, streams, lakes, and the Gulf of
Mexico/Atlantic Ocean is critical to environmental, economic, and recreational prosperity and to the
health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY); and

    WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection has identified specific water
bodies in (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) as ―impaired‖ as a result of excess nutrients under the
Florida Impaired Waters Rule (Chapter 62-303, Florida Administrative Code); and [Guidance:, if
applicable]
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007   28
    WHEREAS, surface water runoff leaves residential neighborhoods, commercial centers,
industrial areas, and other lands of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) with low permeability soils; and

    WHEREAS, baseflow runoff flows from residential neighborhoods, commercial centers,
industrial areas, and other lands of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) with high permeability soils or
high water tables; and

   WHEREAS, surface water and baseflow runoff enter into natural and constructed stormwater
and drainage conveyances and natural water bodies in (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY); and

    WHEREAS, (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY)’s natural and constructed stormwater and
drainage conveyances regulate the flow of stormwater to prevent flooding; and

    WHEREAS, the overgrowth of vegetation in stormwater and drainage conveyances hinders the
goal of flood prevention; and

    WHEREAS, nutrients are commonly found in various forms as a Fertilizer for turf and
landscape application; and

    WHEREAS, the type of chemical and physical Fertilizer characteristics, amount applied, timing
of application, and the method of application of that Fertilizer have a large impact on the potential
for creating pollution; and

    WHEREAS, the amount of Fertilizer applied should be the minimum necessary for the turf and
landscape to meet initial establishment and maintenance needs; and

      WHEREAS, it is generally recognized that many Florida soils are naturally high in phosphorus;
and

    WHEREAS, it has been recognized by soil science professionals that the use of slow release
nitrogen sources may minimize harmful nitrate leaching under certain conditions ; and

     WHEREAS, nitrogen from slow release sources is more likely to be used by plants and less
likely to leach or wash away in stormwater runoff from heavy rainfall events or over-irrigation.

THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE OF
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), FLORIDA:

3. SHORT TITLE
This ordinance shall be known and may be referred to as the (CITY/COUNTY of _____)
Ordinance for Florida Friendly Fertilizer Use on Urban Landscapes.

4. AUTHORITY

DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007    29
This ordinance is adopted by the (MUNICIPALITY/COUNTY of ____) under its home rule
powers, its police powers to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and under powers
pursuant to the authority granted by Sections 125.568 (Counties) and 166.048 (Cities), Florida
Statutes, in order to implement and enforce the standards, rules, and regulations set forth herein.

5. FINDINGS OF FACT

As a result of impairment to (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY)’S surface waters caused by excessive
nutrients under the Florida Impaired Waters Rule, OR,
As a result of increasing levels of nitrogen in the surface and/or ground water within the aquifers or
springs within the boundaries of (MUNICIPALITY/COUNTY) the GOVERNING BODY OF
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) has determined that the use of fertilizers on lands within
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) create a particularly high risk to contribute to adverse effects on
surface and/or ground water.                     Accordingly, the GOVERNING BOARD OF
(MUNICIPALITY/COUNTY) finds that more restrictive measures than are otherwise required by
the ―Florida Green Industries Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources in Florida, June
2002,” as revised, shall be required by this ordinance. [Guidance: if applicable. Pay particular attention to
the date and title of the document. FDEP intends to update this manual and the training program in 2008-2009.}



6. PURPOSE AND INTENT

This Ordinance regulates the proper use of Fertilizers by any Applicator; requires proper training of
Commercial and Institutional Fertilizer Applicators; establishes training and licensing requirements;
establishes a Prohibited and Restricted Application Period; specifies allowable fertilizer application
rates and methods, fertilizer-free zones, low maintenance zones, and exemptions. The Ordinance
requires the use of Best Management Practices which provide specific management guidelines to
minimize negative secondary and cumulative environmental effects associated with the misuse of
Fertilizers.     These secondary and cumulative effects have been observed in and on
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY)’s natural and constructed stormwater and drainage conveyances,
rivers, creeks, canals, springs, lakes, estuaries and other water bodies. [Guidance: as appropriate]
Collectively, these water bodies are an asset critical to the environmental, recreational, cultural and
economic well-being of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) residents and the health of the public.
Overgrowth of algae and vegetation hinder the effectiveness of flood attenuation provided by
natural and constructed stormwater and drainage conveyances. Regulation of nutrients, including
both phosphorus and nitrogen contained in Fertilizer, will help improve and maintain water and
habitat quality.

7. DEFINITIONS

For this Article, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth in this section unless the
context clearly indicates otherwise.

―Administrator‖ means the (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Administrator, or an administrative
official of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) government designated by the City/County
Administrator to administer and enforce the provisions of this Article.
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007            30
―Application‖ or ―Apply‖ means the actual physical deposit of Fertilizer to Turf or Landscape
Plants.

―Applicator‖ means any Person who applies Fertilizer on Turf and/or Landscape Plants in
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY).

―Board or Governing Board‖ means the Board of City/County Commissioners of
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), Florida.

“Best Management Practices” means turf and landscape practices or combination of practices based on
research, field-testing, and expert review, determined to be the most effective and practicable on-location means,
including economic and technological considerations, for improving water quality, conserving water supplies
and protecting natural resources.
―Code Enforcement Officer, Official, or Inspector‖ means any designated employee or agent of
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) whose duty it is to enforce codes and ordinances enacted by
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY).

―Commercial Fertilizer Applicator‖ means any Person who applies Fertilizer on Turf and/or
Landscape Plants in (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) in exchange for money, goods, services or
other valuable consideration.

―Fertilize,‖ ―Fertilizing,‖ or ―Fertilization‖ means the act of applying Fertilizer to Turf, specialized
Turf, or Landscape Plant.

―Fertilizer‖ means any substance or mixture of substances, except pesticide/fertilizer mixtures such
as ―weed and feed‖ products, that contains one or more recognized plant nutrients and promotes
plant growth, or controls soil acidity or alkalinity, or provides other soil enrichment, or provides
other corrective measures to the soil. [Guidance: Regulation of pest control businesses and applicators, and of
pesticide use, is preempted to the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS) by Chapters
482.242, and 487.051 (2), F.S. and suspected pesticide misuse should be reported to FDACS. Weed and feed
products are registered pesticides. The Limited Commercial Landscape Maintenance Certification Program does not
allow landscape maintenance workers to make any kind of pesticide applications (including weed control and/or weed
and feed products) to any turf areas. Per 482.165(3) F.S., the penalty for unlicensed application of pesticides,
including weed and feed products, may not be less than $500 or more than $5,000 for each offense. ]

―Guaranteed Analysis‖ means the percentage of plant nutrients or measures of neutralizing
capability claimed to be present in a Fertilizer.

―Institutional Applicator‖ means any Person, other than a non-commercial or commercial
Applicator (unless such definitions also apply under the circumstances), that applies Fertilizer for the
purpose of maintaining Turf and/or Landscape Plants. Institutional Applicators shall include, but
shall not be limited to, owners and managers of public lands, schools, parks, religious institutions,
utilities, industrial or business sites and any residential properties maintained in condominium
and/or common ownership.

DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007               31
―Landscape Plant‖ means any native or exotic tree, shrub, or groundcover (excluding Turf).

―Low Maintenance Zone‖ means an area a minimum of six (6) feet wide adjacent to water courses
which is planted and managed in order to minimize the need for fertilization, watering, mowing, etc.

―Pasture‖ means land used for livestock grazing that is managed to provide feed value.

―Person‖ means any natural Person, business, corporation, limited liability company, partnership,
limited partnership, association, club, organization, and/or any group of people acting as an
organized entity.

―Prohibited Application Period‖ means the time period during which a Flood Watch or Warning, or
a Tropical Storm Watch or Warning, or a Hurricane Watch or Warning, or a 3-day Cone of
Uncertainty is in effect for any portion of (CITY/COUNTY), issued by the National Weather
Service.

―Restricted Application Period‖ means the rainy season period between June 1 and September 30.

―(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Approved Best Management Practices Training Program‖ means
a training program approved by the (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Administrator that includes at
a minimum, the most current version of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s
“Florida Green Industries Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources in Florida, June 2002,” as
revised and any more stringent requirements set forth in this Article.

―Slow Release,‖ ―Controlled Release,‖ ―Timed Release,‖ ―Slowly Available,‖ or ―Water Insoluble
Nitrogen‖ means nitrogen in a form which delays its availability for plant uptake and use after
application, or which extends its availability to the plant longer than a reference rapid or quick
release product.

―Specialized Turf Manager‖ means a Person responsible for Fertilizing or directing the Fertilization
of a golf course or athletic field. [Guidance: Some ordinances exempt only publicly owned facilities. Athletes
using fields at private schools, colleges, etc. are also at risk if fields are not properly maintained.]

―Turf,‖ ―Sod,‖ or ―Lawn‖ means a piece of grass-covered soil held together by the roots of the
grass.

8. APPLICABILITY

This Ordinance shall be applicable to and shall regulate any and all Applicators of Fertilizer and
areas of application of Fertilizer within the area of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), unless such
Applicator is specifically exempted by the terms of this Ordinance from the regulatory provisions of
this Ordinance.            This Ordinance shall be prospective only, and shall not impair any existing
contracts. [Guidance: Florida Statues 125.568(3), 166.048(3), and 373.185(3) provided that a deed
restriction or covenant entered after October 1, 2001, or local government ordinance, may not prohibit any property
owner from implementing Xeriscape or Florida-friendly landscape practices on his or her land. Any restrictions created
after this date are void.]


DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007                   32
8. TIMING OF FERTILIZER APPLICATION

No Applicator shall apply Fertilizers containing nitrogen and/or phosphorus to Turf and/or
Landscape Plants during the Prohibited Application Period. During the Restricted Application
Period only one application of nitrogen and/or phosphorus, via a slow release fertilizer, may be
made to existing Turf or Landscape Plants. [Guidance: Iron, manganese, and other non-polluting
micronutrients, may be applied to improve turf color and health.]

9. FERTILIZER CONTENT AND APPLICATION RATES

(a) Fertilizers Applied to Turf and/or Landscape Plants within (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY)
shall be applied in accordance with directions provided by Rule 5E-1.003(2), Florida Administrative
Code, Labeling Requirements For Urban Turf Fertilizers.
[Guidance: The requirement that specialty fertilizers such as 50% Slow Release Nitrogen per Guaranteed Analysis
Label be used should be justified by site specific conditions within the jurisdiction]

(b) Fertilizers should be applied to Turf and/or Landscape Plants at the lowest rate necessary.
Nitrogen shall not be applied at an application rate greater than 0.7 lbs of readily available nitrogen
per 1000 ft2 at any one time based on the soluble fraction of formulated fertilizer, with no more that
1 lb total N per 1000 ft2 to be applied at any one time and not to exceed the annual nitrogen
recommendations in the Fertilization Guidelines for Established Turfgrass Lawns in Three Regions
of Florida, set forth below:

         Fertilization Guidelines for Established Turfgrass Lawns in Three Regions of Florida
                                      Nitrogen recommendations
                                       (lbs N / 1000 ft2 / year)*
                        Species                 North Central South
                 _________________________________________________
                        Bahia grass 2-3         2-4     2-4
                 _________________________________________________
                        Bermuda grass           3-5     4-6     5-7
                        Centipede grass         1-2     2-3     2-3
_                _________________________________________________
                        St. Augustine grass     2-4     2-5     4-6
                 _________________________________________________
                        Zoysiagrass             3-5     3-6     4-6
                 _________________________________________________

*North Florida is north of Ocala. Central Florida is defined as south of Ocala to a line extending
from Vero Beach to Tampa. South Florida includes the remaining southern portion of the state.



DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007             33
(c) For new turf or landscape plants that are being installed or established, a one-time use of starter
fertilizer as described in Rule 5E-1.003 shall be allowed at an application rate not to exceed 1.0 lb of
P2O5/1,000 ft2.

(d) No phosphorus Fertilizer shall be Applied to existing Turf and/or Landscape Plants within
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) at application rates which exceed 0.25 lbs. P2O5/1,000 ft2 per
application nor exceed 0.50 lbs. P2O5/1,000 ft2 per year,

(e) Nitrogen or phosphorus Fertilizer may not be applied to turf or landscape plants except as
provided above unless a soil or tissue deficiency has been verified by an approved soil test. [Additional
Guidance: Soil and tissue tests for phosphorus are normally done by UF/IFAS or another accredited laboratory.
FDEP has sponsored research (ca. 2007-2008) to compare several retail home test kits to IFAS extension lab
results for a wide variety of Florida soils. This may allow more convenient testing by homeowners, although
enforcement may be more difficult without written test results.]

10. IMPERVIOUS SURFACES

Fertilizer shall not be applied, spilled, or otherwise deposited on any impervious surfaces. Any
Fertilizer applied, spilled, or deposited, either intentionally or accidentally, on any impervious surface
shall be immediately and completely removed to the greatest extent practicable. Fertilizer released
on an impervious surface must be immediately contained and either legally applied to Turf or any
other legal site, or returned to the original or other appropriate container. In no case shall Fertilizer
be washed, swept, or blown off impervious surfaces into stormwater drains, ditches, conveyances, or
water bodies.

11. FERTILIZER FREE ZONES

Fertilizer shall not be applied within ten (10) feet of any pond, stream, water course, lake, canal, or
wetland as defined by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Chapter 62-340,
Florida Administrative Code) or from the top of a seawall. If more stringent (MUNICIPALITY /
COUNTY) Code regulations apply, this provision does not relieve the requirement to adhere to the
more stringent regulations. Newly planted Turf and/or Landscape Plants may be fertilized in this
Zone only for the first sixty (60) day establishment period.

12. LOW MAINTENANCE ZONES

A voluntary six (6) foot low maintenance zone is strongly recommended, but not mandated, from
any pond, stream, water course, lake, wetland or from the top of a seawall. A swale/berm system is
recommended for installation at the landward edge of this low maintenance zone to capture and
filter runoff. If more stringent (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Code regulations apply, this
provision does not relieve the requirement to adhere to the more stringent regulations. No mowed
or cut vegetative material shall be deposited or left remaining in this zone or deposited in the water.
Care should be taken to prevent the over-spray of aquatic weed products in this zone. [Guidance:
Care must be taken to ensure erosion of the surface soil does not occur. Excessive erosion may be a greater pollution
hazard than occasional proper applications of fertilizer.]

13. MODE OF APPLICATION
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007                  34
Spreader deflector shields are required when Fertilizing via broadcast spreaders. Deflectors must be
positioned such that Fertilizer granules are deflected away from all impervious surfaces, fertilizer-
free zones and water bodies, including wetlands.

14. MANAGEMENT OF GRASS CLIPPINGS AND VEGETATIVE MATTER

In no case shall grass clippings, vegetative material, and/or vegetative debris either intentionally or
accidentally, be washed, swept, or blown off into stormwater drains, ditches, conveyances, water
bodies, wetlands, or sidewalks or roadways.

15. EXEMPTIONS

The provisions set forth above in this Ordinance shall not apply to:

(a) golf courses and athletic fields. For all golf courses, the provisions of the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP) document, ―BMPs for the Enhancement of Environmental Quality on Florida
Golf Courses, January 2007,” as updated, shall be followed when applying Fertilizer to golf courses. All
other Specialized Turf Managers shall use their best professional judgment to apply the concepts and
principles embodied in the “Florida Green Industries Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources in
Florida, June 2002”as revised, and the instructions in Rule 5E-1.003(2), Florida Administrative Code, while
maintaining the health and function of their Turf and Landscape Plants.

(b) bona fide farm operations as defined in the Florida Right to Farm Act, Section 823.14, Florida
Statutes, provided that fertilizers are applied in accordance with the appropriate Best Management
Practices Manual adopted by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Office
of Agricultural Water Policy for the crop in question.

(c) other properties not subject to or covered under the Florida Right to Farm Act that have
Pastures used for grazing livestock provided that fertilizers are applied in accordance with the
appropriate Best Management Practices Manual adopted by the Florida Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services, Office of Agricultural Water Policy for the crop in question.



16. TRAINING

(a) All Applicators of Fertilizer within the unincorporated area of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY),
other than private homeowners on their own property, shall abide by and successfully complete a
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) approved Best Management Practices training program. This
training shall include the most current version of the FDEP “Florida Green Industries Best Management
Practices for Protection of Water Resources in Florida, June 2002,” as revised and shall include the more
stringent requirements set forth in this ordinance. Upon successful completion, a Certificate of
Completion will be provided. A list of approved training programs shall be maintained by
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) on the (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Fertilizer Management
website.
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007                35
[Guidance: Note anticipated rewrite mentioned above for 2008-2009. The FDEP Training Program is written by
FDEP and IFAS, and approved by FDEP. FDACS and other agencies and organizations also approve the
program for professional CEUs. The IFAS Extension Service maintains records of training, and is (circa late 2007)
working with FDEP to create a permanent, web accessible database of statewide application that will allow the public
or any local government to search the name, trainee and certificate numbers, company, company address, date, place
and type of training (basic, refresher, train-the-trainer, etc.), and trainer identification. After 1/1/2008 the
certificates will be numbered and sealed with a raised seal (only Dr. Trenholm and FDEP Staff have these) and an
additional wallet card with matching trainee and certificate numbers, but no seal.]

(b) A vehicle decal shall be affixed and maintained on the exterior of all vehicles and trailers used in
connection with the application of Fertilizer within the area regulated by this Article. The vehicle
and trailer decals shall be provided by (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY).

(c) Private homeowners are required to follow the recommendations of the University of Florida
IFAS Florida Yards and Neighborhoods program when applying fertilizers.

17. LICENSING OF COMMERCIAL APPLICATORS

(a) In addition to any current or future training or education requirements mandated by the State of
Florida and/or (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), all Commercial Fertilizer Applicators shall obtain a
Certificate of Completion from a (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) approved Best Management
Practices training program prior to obtaining a (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Local Business Tax
Certificate for any category of occupation which may apply any Fertilizer to Turf and/or Landscape
Plants. Commercial Fertilizer Applicators shall provide proof of completion of an approved training
program to the (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Tax Collector’s office within 180 days of the
effective date of this ordinance.

(b) All Commercial Fertilizer Applicators applying for a new or holding an existing Local Business
Tax Certificate shall ensure that all Applicators employed under the Tax Certificate receive the
necessary training in accordance with this ordinance and abide by all provisions of this Ordinance.
All new employees serving as Applicators shall receive the necessary training in accordance with this
Ordinance within 90 days of employment and during this 90 day period shall work under the
physical supervision of an applicator who has successfully completed a (MUNICIPALITY /
COUNTY) approved Best Management Practices training program.

18. ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTY

It is the intent hereof that the administrative, civil, and criminal penalties imposed through execution
of this Article be of such amount as to ensure immediate and continued compliance with this
Article.

(a) (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) has the authority to enforce any provision of this Ordinance
per Chapter 2, Article VIII of the (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Code of Ordinances and per
provisions of Chapter 162, Florida Statutes. Each day of any such violation shall constitute a
separate and distinct offense.


DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007                 36
(b) The Code Enforcement Officer or designated inspectors shall be authorized and empowered to
make inspections at reasonable hours of all land uses or activities regulated by this Ordinance in
order to insure compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. The Code Enforcement Officer
or designated inspector shall make all observations during their inspections from areas accessible by
the public, unless specific permission is granted by a property owner to come on their property, or a
search warrant is obtained from a court of competent jurisdiction.

(c) The Code Enforcement Officer may require corrective actions as a result of the violation
activities.

(d) A Code Enforcement Officer is authorized to issue a Citation to a Person when, based upon
personal investigation, the Officer has reasonable cause to believe that the Person has violated this
Article. Prior to issuing a Citation, a Code Enforcement Officer may provide a Warning Notice to
the Person. The Warning Notice shall specify that the Person has committed a violation of this
Ordinance and must correct the violation immediately. If, upon personal investigation, a Code
Enforcement Officer finds that the Person has not corrected the violation, the Code Enforcement
Officer shall issue a Citation to the Person who has committed the violation. If the Person has been
previously issued a Warning Notice or Citation for the same prohibited activity, the Code
Enforcement Officer may immediately issue a Citation.

(e) After issuing a Citation to an alleged violator, the Code Enforcement Officer shall deposit the
original Citation and one copy of the Citation with the Clerk of the Court.

(f) The Person issued the Citation may contest the Citation by contacting the Clerk of the Court
within 30 calendar days of the Citation date and requesting a hearing. The Clerk shall then schedule
a hearing in the County Court and shall provide written notice of the hearing to the Person and to
the Code Enforcement Officer.

(g) If the Person issued the Citation elects not to contest the Citation, the person shall pay the
applicable civil penalty to the Clerk of the Court within 30 days after issuance of the Citation.

(h) If the Person issued the Citation neither pays the civil penalty within the time allowed nor
requests a hearing to contest the Citation, the Person shall be deemed to have waived their right to
contest the Citation and judgment may be entered against the Person for an amount up to the
maximum civil penalty.

(i) Willful refusal to sign and accept a Citation issued by a Code Enforcement Officer by the cited
Person issued the Citation shall be treated as a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as
provided by Sections 775.082 and 775.083, Florida Statutes.

(j) The civil penalty for a civil infraction shall not exceed $500.00 per violation.

(k) By resolution the Board shall establish the amount of any civil penalty for a civil infraction.

(l) Not withstanding any other provisions of this Ordinance for enforcement or penalties, the Board
may also enforce this Ordinance by actions at law or in equity for damages and injunctive relief. In
the event the Board prevails in any such action, the Board shall be entitled to an award of its costs.

DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007        37
(m) The County may seek a lien on the property when the Person cited for a violation fails to pay
the amount entered as a judgment.

(n) Criminal violations of this Article committed willfully, with reckless indifference, or with gross
careless disregard shall be treated as a misdemeanor, and shall be prosecuted and shall be punishable
as provided by general law.

19. CODIFICATION
This ordinance shall be deemed an amendment to the (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) Code of
Ordinances.

20. SEVERABILITY CLAUSE

If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this Ordinance is for any reason, held
or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative, or void, such holding of invalidity shall not affect the
remaining portions of this Ordinance; and it shall be construed to have been the intent to adopt this
Ordinance without such unconstitutional, invalid, or inoperative part therein; and the remainder of
this Ordinance, after the exclusion of such part or parts, shall be deemed to be held valid as if such
part or parts had not been included herein.

21. EFFECTIVE DATE

This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon filing with the Office of the Secretary of State of
Florida. However, a one hundred eighty (180) day implementation period is hereby established in
order to accomplish the following:

(a) The establishment of a (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY) approved list of Best Management
Practices training programs.

(b) For Commercial Fertilizer Applicators, Institutional Applicators and other users and Applicators
of Fertilizer as set forth in this Ordinance to become familiar with the provisions of this Ordinance,
provide a reasonable period for compliance with the terms of this Ordinance.

No Citations, Notices to Appear, Code Enforcement Notice of Violations or other enforcement
procedures shall be instituted until a 180 day implementation period has passed; however, Warning
Notices may be issued during the implementation period.




DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007       38
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
(MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), FLORIDA, THIS ______ DAY OF AUGUST 20XX, A.D.



                                                 BOARD OF (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY)
                                                 COMMISSIONERS
                                                 OF (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), FLORIDA


                                                 By:_______________________________
                                                                Chair

                                                 Date: _____________________________

ATTEST:
Clerk of the Circuit Court
Ex-Officio Clerk of the Board of County
Commissioners of (MUNICIPALITY / COUNTY), Florida

By: ________________________________
            Deputy Clerk




DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007   39
                                       Appendix #5
                              Best Practices for Lawn Care
1. Choose a fertilizer designed for lawns (N-P-K grade of 29-2-4 or a similar high nitrogen, low phosphorus
   fertilizer). Follow the label instructions for best results. If the product does not list a spreader setting or
   a spreader type, it should not be used on home lawns. Buy the amount of product you need for the
   current growing season.

2. Apply fertilizer when your grass is actively growing, which is after you have begun mowing. If the grass
   is not growing enough to be mowing, wait to apply your fertilizer.

3. Apply fertilizer to the lawn, keeping it off hard surfaces (walks, driveways, etc) where it can be washed
   into storm sewers. If fertilizer gets on hard surfaces, sweep it back into the lawn. Using a drop spreader
   or a rotary spreader with a deflector shield makes it simple and easy to keep fertilizer on the lawn.
   Likewise, keep lawn clippings, leaves, and other plant material off of walks, driveways and roadways to
   prevent them from entering storm sewers and surface waters. Avoid fertilizer application if a major rain
   event is anticipated within 24 hours. Even though healthy lawns effectively hold nutrients in place, heavy
   rainfall could cause some nutrients to flow off the lawn and into surface waters.

4. Mow your lawn at the highest mower setting (~ 4 inches) and leave the grass clippings on your lawn.
   Mowing high allows the grass to develop a deep root system that retains and uses water more efficiently.
   Returning clippings to the lawn recycles nutrients, organic matter, and moisture back into the soil.

5. Use water wisely through proper irrigation. Consider how you use your lawn in determining if you need
   to water. Also, the appearance of your lawn will tell you when it is time to water (leaves will begin to
   wilt/curl and develop a bluish cast). If no rain has fallen, lawns in sandy soil can go ~ 5 days between
   irrigations, while lawns in heavy clay soils can go ~ 20 days.

6. Fertilize in the fall (between Labor Day and Halloween). It is the best time of year to feed, helping your
   lawn recover from summer stress and giving you a great looking, healthy lawn next spring.

7. Pest problems? First consider spot treatment of weed and insect problems with a ready-to-use product,
   and only use broadcast applied pest control products when there is a large, widespread problem. Spot
   treating with ready-to-use products eliminates mixing, measuring, and waste. Broadcast treating with
   ready-to-use granular products for widespread pest problems (large weed or insect problem), likewise
   eliminates mixing, measuring, and makes off-target product easy to sweep back onto your lawn.




DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007                40
             Appendix # 6 CONSUMER FERTILIZER TASK FORCE
                  PUBLIC SIGN-IN AND COMMENT FORM

            FLORIDA CONSUMER FERTILIZER TASK FORCE MEETING IV
                             SIGN-IN SHEET
                     NOVEMBER 14, 2007 – TALLAHASSEE, FL

NAME                        AFFILIATION                    E-MAIL
Barry Troutman              Valley Crest Companies         btroutman@valleycrest.com
Jack Merriam                Sarasota County                jmerriam@acgov.net
Chris Wible                 The Scotts Company             Chris.wible@scotts.com
Casey Wohl Pace             FL Turfgrass Assn.             casey@ftga.org
Sanford Simon               United Industries Corp.        Sandy.simon@spectrumbrands.com
Jim Skillen                 Rise                           jskillen@pestfacts.org
Eric Livuerta               DEP                            Eric.livuerta@dep.omb.fl.us
Stuart DeCew                Sierra Club                    Stuart.decew@sierraclub.org
Rebecca O’Hara              FLC                            rohara@flcities.com
Don Chaney                  Sierra Club                    Dlc100@comcast.net
Mike Holsinger              Holsinger Horticultural        mjholsinger@comcast.net
                            Services
Terril A. Nell              UF-IFAS                        tanell@ufl.edu
Mick Denhaun                City Sanibel
Veronica Craw               SWFWMD                         Veronica.craw@watermatters.org
Mary Hartney                FFAA                           mhartney@ffaa.org
John Cox                    City of Tallahassee            Cox.jo@talgov.com
Gordon A. Leslie, Jr.       EPC/Hillsborough               leslieg@epchc.org
                            County
Blas Gomez                  City of Tallahassee            gomezb@talgov.com
Joel D. Jackson             Florida Golf Course Supt.      flgrn@aol.com
                            Assoc.
Weldin Collier              FDAC                           colliew@doacs.state.fl.us
William Cox                 FDACS                          cox@doacs.state.fl.us
Nancy Miller                TAPP-COT                       nancycaire@comcast.net
Erica Santella              TruGreen FPAA                  Erica-santella@landcare.com
Scott Dudley                Florida League of Cities       sdudley@flcities.com


                                PUBLIC COMMENT FORMS
                     FLORIDA CONSUMER FERTILIZER TASK FORCE
                                 November 14, 2007

Name:                   Barry Troutman
Organization:           Valley Crest Companies

COMMENT:                (1) Recommend that fertilization rate tables be excluded from model
ordinance in favor of referencing the GIBMP. (2) The advantage of their move is that as knowledge
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007     41
improves it is a simple matter to change the recommendation in the BMP rather than very local
ordinance. See attachment.

Name:                     Jim Skillen
Organization:             RISE
COMMENT:                  (1) Specialty fertilizer is not a significant source of nutrients to the
environment. The state of Minnesota banned phosphate in 2004. They did so to improve water
quality. The promised water quality gains have not been realized! (2) The industry needs uniformity
for the smooth flow of commerce. If local municipalities want to exceed the model ordinance it has
to be a high hurdle. (3) Documented harm to human health or the environment from the use of
specialty fertilizer has to be the trigger. If not, any municipality can do whatever they want. That
will make it very difficult for managers and retailers.

Name:                    Sanford R. Simon
Organization:            United Industries Corporation
COMMENT:                 I am encouraged by comments made regarding the direction for consumer
education, and discussion of a state ordinance vs. model local ordinance. However, I am
disappointed that the Sarasota Ordinance was used as the basis of the Strawman Ordinance
presented to the Task Force today. The Sarasota Ordinance is substantially different than the DEP
Model Ordinance dated 9/5/03. The DEP Model is the work product of 21 Agencies and
Associations, which includes: DEP, DOACS, IFAS, Water Management Districts, the League of
Cities and Association of County Governments. This document is very broad and includes BMP’s,
set-back areas, irrigation and landscape design – not all of which are within the scope of the Task
Force legislature change. Relevant section of the DEP Model should have been extracted and used
as the starting point as a draft for the Task Force. Other aspects of the overall DEP Ordinance
could be added as they are further refined. Comments during the last Task Force meeting leads one
to believe that anecdotal assumptions were used in reaching some restrictions in the Sarasota
Ordinance. These assumptions are then perceived by the general public as being factual – which
leads consumers to believe that fertilizers are inherently harmful to the environment, when there is
scientific evidence to the contrary. Political objectives should not be a part of the Task Force
objectives and work product. I want to reiterate the need to maintain uniform standards based on
sound scientific principle and data, which has been accomplished in the Urban Turf Rule.

Name:                   Michael Holsinger
Organization:           Holsinger Horticultural Services

COMMENT:
(1) Model Fertilizer Ordinance: Siesta Key Experience since 1985: #8 Timing of Fertilizer
Application: Why allow application of slow release during rainy season restricted person when
application before rainy season would be effective then. Also percent of slow release is not
specified. Is it 100%? We must remember that every application is a potential pollution event thru
misapplication. Also, that significant nitrogen is recycled thru breakdown of grass clippings and
atmospherically during the rainy season. #9 Fertilizer Content and Application Rates: Explain
why 50% slow release must be justified by site specific conditions. What site conditions would not
be appropriate and IFAS & EPA espouse the benefits of slow release in reducing potential leaching
and runoff. #11 Fertilizer Free Zones: If 10-foot zone adjacent to water bodier is to be fertilizer-
free, why allow any application of fertilizer. Allowing application of fertilizer to new turf and plants
in this zone defeats the intent of this section.
DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007       42
(2) Education: Based on my twenty-plus years as an extension educator: (A) Homeowners not the
main problem because they do not apply that much. (B) But urban fertilizer use has nearly tripled
from 1998 to 2007. (C) Professionals are maintaining most highly-managed properties and
centralized maintenance development. This is when education should be targeted.; Elements that
can make a difference: (A) Model contract specifications with BMPs. (B) Benefits advantages of
long-term slow release, horticulturally and in reducing pollution potential. (C) Promotion of low
input ground covers as turf alternatives.
(3) Proposed DACs Training/Certification: I am approved trainer-limited certification limited
certification history. PCO’s wanted lawn pesticides reserved for them. (A) No rational reasoning
weed and feed. (B) But landscape maintenance wanted to be legal for Roundup. (1) Limited
certification training six hours. (2) DEP over BMP’s 4-6 hours. (3) Plus – local ordinance
requirements.; 1+2+3 Overwhelming! LMA Concerns! Alternative: Scope of audience 50,000+.
Needed: 1-2 hours focused fertilization training consider training on-line!

Name:                    Erica Santella
Organization:            TruGreen
COMMENT:                 (1) Encourage group to do the task and address landscape plants. It is a total
package and you can’t ignore this part. I deal with the public and fertilizing shrubs and palms
properly can be difficult. The average customer wants to see layers of fertilizer on much. Our job is
continually educate on proper wage. (2) Our company has campaign called Delivering The Edge.
Our branches take pictures of our properties and neighbors and show the STRAIGHT lines where
materials do not move; regardless of slope, time of year, species or part of the state. (3) Local
governments do not believe in the Task Force. They are passing local ordinances with a December
31st deadline to them. They are suspicious of what you are doing and warp to get anything passed
prior to your group’s completion. North part last nigh t is just are example. (4) Chapter 482 full
Lto business should be examined. (5) GIBMPs can be used by athletic fields and not us. I feel
disappointed and angry. I have employees that service golf courses, athletic fields, resorts, and entire
communities and home lawns. In two places they can follow BMPs but nowhere else. There needs
to be a discussion on a chapter 482 business – licenses by state and that these companies are
different and in another place than others and needs to be recognized. (6) Finally there seems to be
an idea the fertilizing and having a nice landscape is not good for the environment. Our industry
provides jobs, real estate value and works hard to protect water quality.




DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007       43
                                         QuickTime™ an d a
                                     TIFF (LZW) decomp ressor
                                  are need ed to see this p icture .




DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007   44
                                               QuickTime™ an d a
                                           TIFF (LZW) decomp ressor
                                        are need ed to see this p icture .




DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007   45
                                              QuickTime™ an d a
                                          TIFF (LZW) decomp ressor
                                       are need ed to see this p icture .




DACS Consumer Fertilizer Task Force Meeting IV Draft Meeting Summary, November 14, 2007   46

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:29
posted:6/1/2011
language:English
pages:47