Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Neonicotinoids Nursery Potted Plants topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee weighs extending neonicotinoid application ban to nursery starts and potted plants
Summary
Representative John O'Brien introduced H.372 to add nursery starts and potted plants to existing restrictions on neonicotinoid pesticide use. Legislative counsel said the bill prohibits in‑state application but does not ban sales of treated plants unless amended to add a nondiscriminatory sales prohibition.
Representative John O’Brien, a member of the House Agriculture Committee, introduced H.372, “an act relating to application of neonicotinoid pesticides in nursery starts and herbaceous plants,” describing the public‑policy rationale and the science lawmakers’ testimony has emphasized: neonics are systemic insecticides that can travel in water and persist in the environment, exposing pollinators and aquatic invertebrates.
“Neonics are neurotoxin, so they attack the nervous system of bugs,” O’Brien said, and committee discussion focused on whether banning application to nursery starts and small potted plants would reduce pollinator exposure and environmental transport. O’Brien noted prior bills and actions: the committee has already addressed retail sales for consumer spray products and restrictions on treated seeds and certain spray applications in previous sessions.
Legislative Council counsel clarified the scope and limits of the draft. Michael Grama (Legislative Counsel) told the committee H.372 adds nursery starts and potted plants to the statewide prohibition on application enacted last year, but it stops short of a sales ban: “This is just about application within the state. If you wanted to have a sales prohibition, you can do that. It just needs to be nondiscriminatory.” Counsel explained that a nondiscriminatory sales prohibition — one that applies equally to products originating inside and outside Vermont — would be constitutionally defensible but would require explicit drafting.
Members discussed practical enforcement and market effects. Committee members raised that some large retailers (Home Depot, Walmart) have signaled they are phasing neonics out of many ornamental and bedding plants; O’Brien cited public reporting that major retailers had begun reducing neonic use in their nursery stock. The legislative counsel cautioned that adding a sales prohibition would be legally feasible but would be a separate policy choice from banning in‑state applications.
The bill proposes definitions for “nursery starts” (young plants ready for transplant) and “potted plants” (containerized herbaceous, horticultural or ornamental plants in containers less than one gallon) and would extend the existing application restrictions to those categories. Counsel noted that the statutory framework for pesticides sits in Title 6 (Control of Pesticides) and that careful drafting is needed to avoid preemption or unintended trade issues.
No formal committee vote on H.372 was recorded in the transcript. Counsel and the bill sponsor said a sales prohibition could be added if members wish; the current draft focuses on application in Vermont rather than sale or import of treated plants.
The committee scheduled or anticipated additional testimony; Selection Farms and other stakeholders were referenced as expected witnesses on related topics in coming sessions.
