The council is bringing in a formal scheme for people who want to opt out of having weedkiller used in their street.
But residents wanting to opt out will have to weed the street themselves three times a year to keep pavements clear and safe.
Brighton and Hove City Council said: “Residents can now opt out of the council’s weed maintenance programme by teaming up with neighbours to keep pavements clear themselves.
“The council currently uses a controlled droplet application of glyphosate to treat weeds in the pavement. It’s necessary to keep on top of weed growth and ensure roads and pathways are accessible and clear for all.
“This is a much more targeted method than is used elsewhere and uses a lot less active ingredient. However, some residents have asked for their streets to be excluded from planned treatment.
“In most cases last year, this was not possible, given the scale of work needed to tackle years of unchecked weed growth that left some streets unsafe or inaccessible to wheelchair users, buggies and those with visual or mobility impairments.
“Now the situation is under control, we want to further reduce the amount of glyphosate we use.
“We have listened carefully to the views of residents and are now able to provide support to those who want to work together to keep their streets clear of weeds through our opt-out scheme.
“The opt-out scheme will run alongside our ongoing work to improve the look and feel of our city by reducing weed growth which we know is such an important issue for residents right across the city.
“Following last year’s schedule of work, we have identified a further 72 streets that will not need to be treated this year.
“These have been selected based on current levels of growth and footfall – and whether problematic growth can be managed by the council’s street cleaning teams as part of their day-to-day work.
“To be considered for the opt-out, roads must be within existing 20mph zones and have fewer than 100 homes.
“Any opt-out will need a lead volunteer, who will be given appropriate training and access to the relevant tools. They will also be expected to co-ordinate local volunteers.
“Residents who would like their street to be excluded can now apply for their road to be left out, on the condition that neighbours group together to remove and manage weeds manually at least three times a year.
“The council will support volunteers by providing tools and collecting the waste sacks and will also check that each street is being maintained to a satisfactory level.”
Councillor Tim Rowkins, the council’s cabinet member for net zero and environmental services, said: “Now that we have successfully got the years of unchecked growth under control, we want to reduce the amount of glyphosate being used in a managed and planned way.
“Some residents have told us they’d prefer to look after their own streets and we supported that in an informal way last year by providing the tools and collecting the waste.
“Although that meant their streets were maintained, it didn’t guarantee that no treatment would take place.
“I’m pleased we’re now able to operate a more formal opt-out scheme so that residents have the choice over how weeds on their street are managed.
“It’s vital we keep our pavements free from obstructions and the city fully accessible to all residents and visitors – and we are confident our controlled droplet method is a safe and efficient way of achieving this.
“But we absolutely welcome residents who would like to do their bit in helping clear weeds and keep our city looking its best.”
The council added: “In addition, this year, we will also be running a trial to see what a contracted manual weeding programme might look like in comparison to the current controlled droplet glyphosate treatment.
“This will involve manual removal three times a year in a specified area and an assessment of how effective that approach would be and, crucially, what it would cost if it were rolled out across a wider area.
“Applications for streets to opt out of glyphosate use can be made through the council’s website and must be submitted before Friday 21 March.”
To apply, click here.
So the choice is: accept the council poisoning our street level biodiversity, with the toxic knock on feeding up the chain, or do it ourselves – skip the poison but still leave our streets devoid of nature.
Will there be an option to let nature thrive? To curate our native street plants for the benefit of nature in an extinction crisis within the most nature depleted country in Europe?
Or is it just kill or let it be killed?
Have you not seen the damage and danger to road users and pedestrians caused by inappropriate ‘wilding’ on our roads and footpaths?
No. Have you?
Perhaps move to a farm/a jungle if you want rewilding and nature to take over pavements.There is a massive environmental cost to having inaccessible pavements especially in a town/city so there has to be a balance and this seems pretty sensible so long as it is enforced. And maybe this approach will mean the ‘just get out there and clear your own patch’ brigade will start to think outside their own little ‘boxes’ and take some responsibility for the wider community/ less mobile/able bodied/older parts of our community, or begin to accept that sometimes contained measures are both the least risk and highest benefit to our environment and community.
Specific parks/green spaces (however small) are superb for re-wilding opportunities especially in urban areas but pavements and roads and pedestrian walkways and squares 4ft high with bindweed and discarded crisp packets? Nope.
Probably the best example of word salad you will ever read.
Unfortunately, nature let your tongue thrive. I imagine whatever was offered you wouldn’t be happy. Weeds are not under any extinction crisis and insects have plenty of other pollen sources. Pavement users need to have safe access, some weeds grow in to trees, eg buddleia. I foresee all sorts of administration problems with this proposed scheme. The council need to just keep spraying the weeds.
If you want to let nature thrive outside of your property you should also be liable for any accidents. In our complex our large garden is organic but we use weed likker on pavements and the car park plus we do weeding to keep area’s safe. The council can’t win with residents like you.
So who is going to police this opt out scheme? What happens is some people want to opt out and others don’t? Another madcap scheme from BHCC.
So who is going to police this opt out scheme? What happens if some people want to opt out and others don’t? Another madcap scheme from BHCC.
Simple. You just leave it on the others on your street to do the weed clearing if you don’t want to get involved yourself.
But perhaps this is actually a way to demonstrate that despite all the shouting and screaming about “poison” etc that few of those people doing that shouting are actually prepared to do something practical instead to reduce its usage.
I, and others, have previously said on these “weed” articles that if you don’t want the weed killer to be used on the pavements near your home is to clear the weeds yourself and some people have been doing that already for a considerable time. If there are no weeds there is nothing to be sprayed!
Exactly, the trouble is some residents think just leaving pavements to go to nature is right. They don’t want weed killer and they don’t want the weeds manually cleared. To solve the problem the council should give them the option to leave in front of their property to go wild and make that resident liable for any accidents. I bet they would stop moaning then.
Absolutely Chris, we have a group of us that go out and manually clear, do the pavement edging, etc. We also spray the important areas, and for balance, we do a lot of community planting in the area.
People are quick to moan, but I rarely see those out doing stuff for themselves.
We are talking here about chemicals that poison our water supply and kill our pollinators and plants while we face a crisis in bio diversity and is banned in France !
An opt out system is not the exit strategy that the cou cil promised