About

Important information

• Advertising Review:

  On August 21, 2019, BBB contacted this business regarding the advertising claims on their website. Specifically, BBB requested documentation or support for the claims that the fertilizer and lawn care products as well as the insect and fungus control products are 'organic'. BBB also requested updated information about the owner of the business as the site claims they are 'former University of Minnesota Horticulture Department Staff Member'.  Despite several communications to the business, no information or response was provided to BBB. 

  The BBB Code of Advertising states: 1. Basic Principles of the Code  1.1 The primary responsibility for truthful and non-deceptive advertising rests with the advertiser. Advertisers should be prepared to substantiate any objective claims or offers made before publication or broadcast. Upon request, they should present such substantiation promptly to the advertising medium or BBB. 1.2 Advertisements which are untrue, misleading, deceptive, fraudulent, falsely disparaging of competitors, or insincere offers to sell, shall not be used.  1.3 An advertisement as a whole may be misleading by implication, although every sentence separately considered may be literally true. 1.4 Misrepresentation may result not only from direct statements, but by omitting or obscuring a material fact.

  36. Environmental Benefit Claims   36.1 General Principles  36.1.1 Advertisers should not make broad, unqualified general environmental benefit claims like “green” or “eco-friendly.” 36.1.2 Advertisers must qualify general claims with specific environmental benefits.  36.1.3 Advertisers must possess competent and reliable evidence (often scientific evidence) to support all environmental benefit claims. Qualifications for any claim must be clear, conspicuous and understandable.  36.1.4 When an advertiser qualifies a general claim with a specific benefit, the benefit should be significant. Advertisers must not highlight small or unimportant benefits.  36.1.5 Unless clear from the context, any environmental claim must specify clearly and conspicuously whether the claim applies to the product, the product’s packaging, a service or just to a portion of the product, package or service.  36.4 Non-toxic  36.4.1 Non-toxic claims likely convey that a product, package or service is non-toxic both for humans and for the environment generally. Thus advertisers must either possess competent and reliable scientific evidence that this is the case or clearly and conspicuously qualify the claim to avoid confusion.  36.5 Certifications and Approvals  36.5.1 An advertiser’s unqualified use of environmental certifications and seals of approval may imply to consumers that the certificate or seal was awarded by an independent third party. If that certification or seal was not, in fact, awarded by an independent third party, the advertisement must clearly and conspicuously disclose that fact.  36.5.2 In addition, environmental certifications and seals that do not clearly convey the basis for the certification are likely to convey general environmental benefits. Because claims making general environmental benefits should not be used (see section 36.1) advertisers must clearly and conspicuously disclose the specific and limited benefits to which the certificate or seal applies.  For detailed guidance, advertisers in the U.S. should consult the Federal Trade Commission Green Guides.