Athletes, environmentalists debate proposed statewide ban on artificial turf fields in Maine
Apr. 9—There is a price to be paid whenever Ben Grassi plays soccer on synthetic turf.
The senior Mount View High School defender told state lawmakers Wednesday that his knees and hips ache from trying to start, stop and jump on the slippery, pebble-topped surfaces at rival schools. And because the rubber absorbs heat, turf fields leave him more tired and dehydrated than grass.
The varsity co-captain says synthetic turf slide burns are more painful and heal slower than grass burns.
"As you consider state policy around artificial turf, it is my hope that you prioritize the health and success of Maine student-athletes, rather than any perceived benefits regarding ease of maintenance and cost savings," Grassi said during a legislative committee hearing on a proposed artificial turf moratorium.
The proposed legislation, LD 1177, would pause the installation of new synthetic turf statewide for three years while the Maine Department of Environmental Protection completes a study of its environmental and health impacts. Existing fields could remain in use but could not be patched or replaced.
Artificial turf has been a topic of heated debate for years, in Maine and across the country.
Critics highlight the environmental and health risks. Synthetic turf contributes to microplastic pollution and often contains toxic chemicals and heavy metals like lead and mercury that can leach into the soil and groundwater. It can become dangerously hot in the summer, posing risks to athletes.
Supporters like its durability, low maintenance and year-round usability. Synthetic turf doesn't require watering or mowing, making it attractive to communities looking to save on upkeep costs. It provides a consistent playing surface in adverse weather conditions, like those in Maine.
Biddeford Athletic Director Dennis Walton led the charge in defense of synthetic turf during Wednesday's three-hour public hearing. He said synthetic turf had some environmental benefits over grass fields that critics didn't want to admit, like not needing pesticides and using less water.
His biggest complaint was about the bill's top-down approach to making community decisions.
"This legislation undermines the principle of local control that should govern these important decisions," Walton said. "If the goal is truly to gather information, why not conduct the study without restricting local control in the meantime?"
His concerns were echoed by the athletic directors from Lewiston and Sanford high schools, as well the University of Maine — which highlighted student-athlete support for playing on synthetic turf — and a trade group of independent high schools and colleges that include Colby, Bates and Bowdoin.
The Mills administration didn't take a position on the bill, which was introduced by Assistant House Majority Leader Lori Gramlich, D-Old Orchard Beach.
DEP Commissioner Melanie Loyzim said it was logical to question the use of synthetic turf but warned that her department would need funding to conduct such a study.
The number of Maine middle and high schools with artificial turf has more than doubled in the last decade.
There are 35 middle and high schools with artificial turf fields, plus another 20 or so at Maine colleges, said Mike Burnham, executive director of the Maine Principals' Association.
Many of those projects have met with local resistance from groups worried about environmental damages. But new artificial turf fields have replaced natural grass fields at several high schools in the last five years, including at Kennebunk, Messalonskee in Oakland, Cony in Augusta and Gardiner.
South Portland will ask voters to choose whether they want to improve the school's athletic complex with a $4.3 million natural grass option, a $5.1 million artificial turf option or no improvements. Kittery, Cumberland and the Gray-New Gloucester district have all grappled with the issue over the last year.
Copy the Story Link
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Yahoo
Lawmaker seeks to refine ‘overly broad' PFAS definition to allow for some pesticide use
Rather than creating a more limited definition, Maine Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Melanie Loyzim said uses of PFAS that are 'economically important' but don't pose health risks should be evaluated individually. (Photo by Getty Images) After lawmakers couldn't agree on which committee should handle her proposal to regulate forever chemicals in pesticides, Rep. Amy Arata is taking a new, more sweeping approach. The Republican from New Gloucester got approval from legislative leaders to introduce a late-session bill (LD 1982) that would change how perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known as PFAS, are defined in state law. She believes the current definition is overly broad and could include chemicals that don't pose the same long-term health problems as PFAS, which have been linked to cancer and weakened immune systems. During a public hearing Monday, Arata introduced her proposal for Maine to adopt the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's narrower definition for PFAS, which was changed under the Biden administration. The proposal would narrow the definition from any fluorinated organic chemical containing at least one fully fluorinated carbon atom to substances containing any one of three specific chemical structures. She told the Legislature's Environment and Natural Resources committee that her bipartisan proposal is 'merely a refinement' of the existing definition. Arata is largely concerned with farmers being unable to use certain pesticides that would fall under the state's current definition. She said changing Maine's definition to align with that federal definition would still 'protect the health of Maine citizens while also allowing our farmers and other industries to be competitive nationwide.' However, Commissioner Melanie Loyzim said the Department of Environmental Protection opposes the bill because the state already has a process for people to seek exemptions to use products with PFAS that would otherwise be prohibited under the state ban that will be rolling out in the coming years. Under the state's PFAS products ban, any product containing intentionally added PFAS can not be sold in the state after Jan. 1, 2030. The department's website includes step-by-step instructions for requesting exemptions for certain products with currently unavoidable use. Rather than creating a more limited definition, Loyzim said uses of PFAS that are 'economically important' but don't pose health risks should be evaluated individually. Loyzim also argued that this change wouldn't actually create uniformity with the federal guidelines because the EPA uses different definitions based on the specific regulation, such as the Safe Drinking Water Act versus the Toxic Substances Control Act. Arata said her bill would not precipitate other changes in Maine laws related to PFAS, but Loyzim said that definition is used in multiple areas of statute including those pertaining to wastewater discharge, land application of sewage, food packaging and more. Nancy McBrady, deputy commissioner for the Maine Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry, acknowledged that farmers could be hurt by a prohibition on certain pesticides that would fall under the state's PFAS products bans, but warned LD 1982 is too broad. Rather, she suggested the Legislature pursue a narrower discussion on PFAS and pesticides in the next session. However, that conversation would likely need to go before the Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Committee. The Maine State Chamber of Commerce argues Arata's proposal could create greater consistency and clarity for business, especially those who deal with national supply chains. The Maine Potato Board echoed this point when speaking in support of the bill. However, other environmental organizations including the Friends of Casco Bay, Defend Our Health and the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association opposed the bill. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Yahoo
Forgoing moratorium, committee backs plan to study health impacts of artificial turf
Artificial turf can contain some toxic chemicals, including phthalates, which have been known to increase risks of cancer, asthma and other negative health outcomes. (Photo: Aire images/ Getty) Forgoing a moratorium on new artificial turf fields, lawmakers are recommending the state still study the effects they could have on public health and the environment. The members of the Legislature's Environment and Natural Resources Committee who were present for a work session Wednesday afternoon unanimously endorsed an amended version of LD 1177. The bill will next go to the Maine House of Representatives and Senate for approval. Originally, the bill sought to place a three-year moratorium on the installation and reinstallation of synthetic turf athletic fields while the Department of Environmental Protection conducted a study to determine how those materials interact with the health of local environments and the people who recreate on those fields. However, the amended bill backed by the committee nixed the moratorium and narrowed the study to look at how synthetic turf affects ambient air, groundwater and surrounding organisms, as well as disposal options once the fields reach the end of their life. The study would also evaluate any release of microplastics from the fields and the effect of that on the surrounding environment and human health. The department would need to submit a report to the Legislature with its findings in the study by January 2028. Commissioner Melanie Loyzim said the department is comfortable with the amended proposal and feels it is within their expertise and jurisdiction. However, she said it will require additional resources so the bill will likely end up on what is called the 'special study table,' where legislative leaders determine which studies will get funded. If the department used an environmental consulting firm to assist with the study, Loyzim said it could cost around $100,000 to $200,000, but the department would look to use students and research resources from the University of Maine, potentially, to bring those costs down. Sen. Denise Tepler (D-Sagadahoc), who co-chairs the committee, said it was interesting to hear conflicting science on the issue, so she thinks an analysis of existing literature and any new research would be helpful for future decision making. Her fellow co-chair, Rep. Vicki Doudera (D-Camden), echoed the sentiment, describing the turf issue as 'tricky.' 'I really am in support of studying this further and getting a handle on what's going on,' Doudera said. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
09-04-2025
- Yahoo
Athletes, environmentalists debate proposed statewide ban on artificial turf fields in Maine
Apr. 9—There is a price to be paid whenever Ben Grassi plays soccer on synthetic turf. The senior Mount View High School defender told state lawmakers Wednesday that his knees and hips ache from trying to start, stop and jump on the slippery, pebble-topped surfaces at rival schools. And because the rubber absorbs heat, turf fields leave him more tired and dehydrated than grass. The varsity co-captain says synthetic turf slide burns are more painful and heal slower than grass burns. "As you consider state policy around artificial turf, it is my hope that you prioritize the health and success of Maine student-athletes, rather than any perceived benefits regarding ease of maintenance and cost savings," Grassi said during a legislative committee hearing on a proposed artificial turf moratorium. The proposed legislation, LD 1177, would pause the installation of new synthetic turf statewide for three years while the Maine Department of Environmental Protection completes a study of its environmental and health impacts. Existing fields could remain in use but could not be patched or replaced. Artificial turf has been a topic of heated debate for years, in Maine and across the country. Critics highlight the environmental and health risks. Synthetic turf contributes to microplastic pollution and often contains toxic chemicals and heavy metals like lead and mercury that can leach into the soil and groundwater. It can become dangerously hot in the summer, posing risks to athletes. Supporters like its durability, low maintenance and year-round usability. Synthetic turf doesn't require watering or mowing, making it attractive to communities looking to save on upkeep costs. It provides a consistent playing surface in adverse weather conditions, like those in Maine. Biddeford Athletic Director Dennis Walton led the charge in defense of synthetic turf during Wednesday's three-hour public hearing. He said synthetic turf had some environmental benefits over grass fields that critics didn't want to admit, like not needing pesticides and using less water. His biggest complaint was about the bill's top-down approach to making community decisions. "This legislation undermines the principle of local control that should govern these important decisions," Walton said. "If the goal is truly to gather information, why not conduct the study without restricting local control in the meantime?" His concerns were echoed by the athletic directors from Lewiston and Sanford high schools, as well the University of Maine — which highlighted student-athlete support for playing on synthetic turf — and a trade group of independent high schools and colleges that include Colby, Bates and Bowdoin. The Mills administration didn't take a position on the bill, which was introduced by Assistant House Majority Leader Lori Gramlich, D-Old Orchard Beach. DEP Commissioner Melanie Loyzim said it was logical to question the use of synthetic turf but warned that her department would need funding to conduct such a study. The number of Maine middle and high schools with artificial turf has more than doubled in the last decade. There are 35 middle and high schools with artificial turf fields, plus another 20 or so at Maine colleges, said Mike Burnham, executive director of the Maine Principals' Association. Many of those projects have met with local resistance from groups worried about environmental damages. But new artificial turf fields have replaced natural grass fields at several high schools in the last five years, including at Kennebunk, Messalonskee in Oakland, Cony in Augusta and Gardiner. South Portland will ask voters to choose whether they want to improve the school's athletic complex with a $4.3 million natural grass option, a $5.1 million artificial turf option or no improvements. Kittery, Cumberland and the Gray-New Gloucester district have all grappled with the issue over the last year. Copy the Story Link
