02/28/2001 Env Bd Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Weed Laws Article on Landscaping (John Marshall Law Review) Page 21 of 27 illegal. Since weed inspectors have no guidelines to determine if a homeowner violates the weed law, this is unfair and unconstitutional. C. Weed Laws as Irrational in Violation of the Equal Protection Clause and Unreasonable in Violation of the Common Law If natural gardening is not a fundamental right and the weed law is not vague, the party charged with violating a weed law may nevertheless challenge the rationale for a weed law. An ordinance must not only be rational to survive constitutional scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause,163 but under the common law, municipal ordinances must pass a more exacting standard of reasonable- ness.164 Natural gardeners have successfully proven that local weed laws are irrational and unreasonable as applied to natural landscapes.165 Natural landscapes are attractive and they do not decrease property values. More directly, natural landscapes do not create a health hazard, as cases have proven. Some uninformed government officials and citizens believe that natural landscapes cause problems with pollen, fire hazards, rats, and mosquitoes. These mistaken beliefs are all soundly refuted by testimony and studies. In fact, natural landscapes reduce many of the very hazards that weed laws are intended to prevent. 1. Fire One of the most common arguments asserted in favor of local weed ordinances is fire prevention. As to natural landscapes this argument is predicated on the unproven contention that tall grass and forb stems, commonly planted as part of a prairie or meadow, constitute a fire hazard. This is not, in fact, true. In New Berlin v. Donald C Hagar,166 United States Forest Service expert David Seaberg testified that a grass fire can sustain high heat for only twenty seconds. In order to ignite wood and sustain a fire potentially damaging to a home, a grass fire must burn within four feet of the home for seven and a half minutes. Judge Gramling agreed, finding no rational basis for the claim that natural landscapes create a fire hazard.167 According to John Diekelmann, a noted landscape architect and plant ecologist, most prairie or meadow plantings contain a large portion of green leafy material at ground level during most seasons and do not sustain fire.i68 In short, restoring an area as prairie does not create a fire hazard. Moreover, if fire prevention were the purpose, a rational ordinance would prohibit the accumulation of biomass in a given area based on some index of flammability, not merely undefined weeds. 2. Vermin A second common argument raised in defense of local weed laws is that naturally vegetated areas sustain rats and other vermin. Rats and other animals commonly regarded as vermin require a steady food supply. Natural vegetation in yards does not provide the type and quantity of food required to sustain a population of rats http: / /www.epa.gov /glnpo /greenacres /weedlaws /JMLR.html 2/22/01