A recent letter to the editor outlined why Newton should reject the installation of any new synthetic turf. The letter concludes with “They all say ‘The science is clear.’ Artificial turf is a bad choice for Newton.“
As a resident involved with Youth Athletics in Newton for over a decade (volunteer, coach, referee, parent), I am greatly concerned with the “ban all turf approach.” The focus on eliminating a specific playing surface is being done in a vacuum. Turf ban discussions lack any review of the benefits of synthetic turf fields, the impact of banning them, and how to develop a cost effective plan to find alternatives that meet the needs of athletes. Those of us involved in Youth Athletics do not share your grave concerns. We agree that given the choice, a WELL MAINTAINED grass field is preferrable — but that choice is rarely available.
The real challenge is how to provide safe and functional playing surfaces for our athletes? Currently, most municipalities in New England are barely (frequently not) able to maintain quality grass fields that are safe for athletes. Use of these facilities is only increasing and for good reason: Athletics benefit our growing community. Turf fields are a key part of many cities’ operating model — including Newton’s — to provide significantly more playing hours than grass fields. Thousands of families support turf fields in Newton. Those with concerns need to step up and become a part of the solution and not simply work to ban facilities that provide significant benefits. Synthetic turf fields are a critical addition to the portfolio of facilities that balances use, the environment, and cost to construct and operate.
When you have eggs and bacon for breakfast, you know that the chicken made a contribution. The pig made a commitment. — Business Fable, Unknown
Justin Traxler
Waban
