Schools in the US are encouraged to radically decrease their pesticide usage by 2015 in plans unveiled in January by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This new plan would cut school pesticide use by 70%, but some say voluntary guidelines are not enough.

Under the new plan, all public schools are encouraged to adopt Integrated Pest Management practices (IPM) by 2015. This could reduce the use of pesticides by at least 70 percent, experts predict. However some health professionals say that these voluntary measures are not enough, arguing that schools should be protected by mandates. IPM relies on the school body to take a ‘hands-on’ approach to pest management – with staff and students taking greater responsibility.

Currently, many schools rely on pesticide spraying as a method of pest control. In a recent report from Indiana University it was stated that over 80 percent of schools in America apply pesticides on a regular basis, regardless of whether they have a pest problem. The health repercussions of frequent pesticide exposure are vast, from triggering asthma attacks to causing learning disabilities and neurological disorders.

It is widely known that children are especially vulnerable to pesticides. Currently thirty-six states have school pesticide regulations, the IPM plan will help reduce pesticide use even further.

The EPA’s new plan encourages non-chemical, practical approaches – installing door sweeps, using steel wool to plug holes, and setting live traps for mice.

However, there remains some flexibility in chemical use. Currently the EPA labels all potentially hazardous pesticides with the words “Caution,” “Warning” or “Danger”. Under the new plan, ‘Caution’ should only be used if exposure to students and staff is minimized. Pesticides with “Warning” or “Danger” labels are not recommended.

The pilot scheme for the strategy was enormously successful, participating schools reduced their pesticide use by around 90 percent. The new plan however is not a federal mandate, and does not include funding to help schools change their pest management approach. Once implemented, there are no enforcement measures to ensure that schools meet the EPA’s recommendations. Whilst it may be true, as the EPA maintain, that the change over does not require a huge overhaul and can be easily managed, will voluntary guild lines really cut it? Environmental health officials support the new plan but there is general criticism that it fails to really protect children and teachers from pesticides. The Pesticide Action Network of America state that the plan has been severely watered down by pressures from industry.

Criticisms aside however, it is encouraging to see such wide reaching and high profile actions against excessive pesticide use – even if the IPM plan is far from perfect. Currently, 36 states have school pesticide regulations– the new IPM plan will help to increase these numbers and provide them with a framework.