Our neighbour Patrick Swan of Northdown Street suggested this be posted to the local community. He has sent the following letter to our local press to hopefully raise the issue publically.
Islington Council have a new street cleaning/garbage collecting contract with Enterprise. We have been told that, instead of manual weed removal from places like public tree pits, Enterprise will be using herbicidal sprays instead, presumably to save on staff costs as it is probably more cost effective for Enterprise than employing people to hoe out the weeds.
The group who take care of Islington’s public trees apparently were not made aware of this until today, when we told them and are very concerned that spraying of herbicides in tree pits could take place. Apart from the human health hazard, the trees themselves are likely to be damaged and there is also the possibility of health hazards for dogs.
We have made a special request to Islington street cleansing not to have herbicides sprayed on our street or in our communal garden, a request which was noted by them and confirmed.
This proposal to spray herbicides is environmentally unfriendly, a health hazard to humans/pets and to the trees and shrubs which grow in public places.
We would be very happy if you could look into this on behalf of Islington residents.
Kind regards,
Patrick Swan
Northdown Street
Our Councillor Paul Convery was copied and wrote to the department concerned and received the following response.
Dear Cllr Convery,
I was copied into this correspondence and wanted to re-assure you.
Our street cleaning contractors have used the application of glyphosate to eradicate weed growth for a number of years. It is an effective treatment method and not an environmental or health hazard when applied by trained staff. It is normally applied at the start of the spring season.
Street cleaners supplement this activity and remove weed growth as part of the normal street cleaning service.
Yours sincerely
Kenny Wilks
Head of Street Environment Services (Public Realm) Environment and Regeneration Islington Council
If you have a view on this matter please register your comments below
Kings Cross Environment 
I most certainly support the use of glyphosate as opposed to hand weeding. Glyphosate has been around for around 30 years and used globally and is, as far as chemicals can be, one of the most benign in environmental terms. It is deactivated when it hits the soil and ingested by the soil micro-organisms. It is only effective when sprayed onto and absorbed by the leafy green tissues of the plant, from whence it is translocated down to the roots. This is why it is such a valuable herbicide because it is effective against the toughest, most aggressive weeds such as couch grass, bindweed and our greatest threat: Japanese knotweed. Hand weeding would be extremely expensive and in many cases ineffective because the deep rooted perennial weeds would have their roots inter-twined with the street trees roots. The slightest fragment of root left in the ground will regenerate.
I am no fan of global corporations, such as glyphosate’s original sponsor “Monsanto” but I am an experienced horticulturist and I value any technology which reduces back breaking hard labour.
Mike is of course absolutely right about the merits of glyphosate, and as someone attempting to be as environmentally friendly as I can, I do very occasionally use it myself.
My concern isn’t about the method being used, but the potential damage Enterprise staff may unwittingly do to local guerrilla gardening and tree pit planting. I do hope that LBI will make sure Enterprise staff are aware of this vital ecological activity and that their contract will include penalty clauses if any tree pit planting is destroyed.
I don’t agree with either of you with regard to glyphosate and neither does the US Evironmental Protection Agency and other US authorities when it comes to the damage it does over the long term to plant and human health. This is the reason the residents of upper Northdown Street have requested no spraying in our communal garden or on our street.
I’m afraid I disagree with the casual use of glyphosate in the environment. It may be easier and more convenient than hand weeding but this chemical still has some serious issues. I quote:
In the UK, a local authority was prosecuted after a child was accidentally sprayed with a glyphosate formulation and suffered allergic reactions. Recently there have also been claims from residents of St. Just in Cornwall that they have suffered severe reactions following application of glyphosate for weed control(11).
In the UK, glyphosate is the most frequent cause of complaints and poisoning incidents recorded by the Health and Safety Executive’s Pesticides Incidents Appraisal Panel (PIAP). Between 1990 and 1995, 33 complaints were received and 34 poisonings recorded including a single death by suicide in 1990(12,13). In California, glyphosate is one of the most commonly reported causes of illness or injury to workers from pesticides. The most common complaints are eye and skin irritation(14). The US authorities have recommended a no re-entry period of 12 hours where glyphosate is used in agricultural or industrial situations. No such recommendation exists in the UK.
For further info please see: http://www.pan-uk.org
This is a copy of an email I sent to Kenny Wilks:
Dear Mr Wilks,
I have seen your response to our community’s complaints about the spraying of the above substance around tree pits, and presumably other places in Islington where there are weeds.
I absolutely take exception to your comment ” not an environmental or health hazard when applied by trained staff”.
The staff may be trained to apply the product (I hope they wear breathing protection) but that has nothing to do with its effect on the environment and human/animal/reptile health in the long term. There is plenty of evidence on the internet about glyphosate’s effects, including postings from the US Environmental Protection Agency and other fact sheets.
Spraying is merely a more cost effective way of removing weeds and I am sure saves money for Islington Council/Enterprise. We have made a special request that this product should not be used on upper Northdown Street or in our communal garden. We can make our own judgements about glyphosate.
I agree that glyphosate has got a relatively low toxicity, but it does have a Class I rating (“severe”) for eye irritation according to the US Environmental Protection Agency.
In our garden I only ever use glyphosate for the control of Japanese Knotweed … we back onto the railway embankments which are awash with this aggressive and invasive pest … as it’s the only effective control.
Other than this kind of use, Glyphosate seems a very heavy-handed way of doing simple street weeding. Indeed, I favour manual weeding particularly of tree pits because it breaks-up the soil, reduces water run-off and permits favoured plants to flourish. Indeed one of the Council’s latest wheezes (“Go wild in the streets”) is to encourage residents to plant and tend flowers in tree pits (they are even handing out a pack of seeds). Zapping tree pits with glyphosate seems to undermine this ambition. Sadly, it’s not unusual for one part of the Council to be tugging in a different direction to another.
Dorset, East Dorset, Bournemouth, and Salisbury Council have adopted the practice of using herbicide to control weed, shrub & tree growth along roadsides council wide. When I complained about the resulting damage to my garden and health, I was stonewalled. I regularly experience muscle, joint ache, stinging eyes and reduced vision, burning lungs, insomnia (on the days they spray). In one particular incident, after walking barefoot on my wet lawn I woke in severe pain, which over 5 days moved up my legs, to lower back, neck then across to my left arm and shoulder. I am worried that this practice is damaging my health permanently.
I believe it is against regulation to spray within a certain distance from housing, but the council are spraying plants growing up against the house and regularly soak our entire back garden with herbicide owing to it’s proximity to the road.
Unfortunately, it seems very difficult to prove anything without paying for tests that cost £150 a time. And even it this were done, I would need to catch them in the act.
It is astonishing in the apparently environgmentally enlightened age that this practice is allowed.
Hi All
Mr Wilks is an ignorant fellow. As long he is getting perks from Enterprise, he do not care about the environment. He is somebody working as Head of Service in Islington Council and I doubt he has any academic skill.
I understand he has brought his team of cronies from Camden Council and he has the backing of the Assistant Director.
The more recent cronyism was the appointment of a non qualified agency staff (girlfriend of the son of his mistress) as the Transport Manager.
Keep it Islington Council!!
I have just had my new ‘bee border’ seriously damaged by Hackney Council’s ‘trained’ staff spraying herbicide carelessly in the street. Apart from the cost of replacing the plants I am seriously concerned that this was done when bees and other pollinators were foraging and small children were being taken in buggies to the nearby Children’s Centre. I am a beekeeper and have a pile of dead bees and am considering sending them to FERA bee unit inspectors for a toxicology report. Ironic that Hackney Council put packets of wildflower seeds through my door in the same week their ‘death squad’ was killing every wild flower in sight.