Resident urges committee to explore alternatives to neighborhood mosquito spraying, promote native plants

A resident who identified herself as Anne, and said she lives on Keystone Lane, urged the Clemson Sustainability Committee on March 12 to examine the city’s mosquito-spraying practices and to promote native plants and leaf-litter retention as alternatives.

The resident said she and neighbors remember nights when fireflies and butterflies were common and reported local beekeepers are losing hives. “Mosquito spraying is a good thing and there’s a lot of people that will go to the mat with me in the downs — I’m not saying that I’m totally opposed to it,” she said. She added that product labels recommending people keep pets inside after spraying raise concerns about non-target impacts.

Why it matters: The comment linked local changes in insect abundance to both pesticide use and habitat loss. The speaker asked whether the city would provide residents with information on nonchemical personal protection (for example, repellents) and steps neighborhoods can take — planting native wildflowers, leaving leaf litter for butterfly eggs and creating pocket pollinator habitats — to reduce reliance on large-area spraying.

Committee response and next steps: Committee members said the topic has been discussed previously at City Council and that lakeshore residents have sometimes driven spraying requests. Committee members suggested follow-up through Clemson Extension and the Botanical Garden; Tony (City staff) later identified Clemson Cooperative Extension as a local resource. No formal action was taken at this meeting; the resident’s remarks were received during public comment and folded into ongoing outreach and the committee’s broader conservation work.

Context and limitations: The resident acknowledged she was not a subject-matter expert and referenced a League meeting where committee member Chris White spoke about National Wildlife Federation (NWF) certification. Committee members and the resident named local examples of declining pollinators and called for more outreach and native-planting programs but did not present empirical spray-usage or pesticide-application records at the meeting. The committee did not vote or direct staff to change spraying policy during the session.

Ending: Committee members encouraged the resident to follow up with staff and community groups; staff and local partners mentioned later in the meeting (Clemson Extension, South Carolina Botanical Garden, NWF-related volunteers) were identified as channels for public education and neighborhood outreach.