(Beyond Pesticides, January 6, 2011) On Monday, a coalition of farmworkers, community activists and environmental health organizations announced a lawsuit challenging the approval of the toxic fumigant methyl iodide for use on California’s strawberry fields, urging the new Governor Jerry Brown to reverse the decision. The groups also submitted comments from over 52,000 members of the public urging Gov. Brown to act quickly to prevent the use of methyl iodide in California’s fields. The lawsuit was filed late last week by Earthjustice and California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc. on behalf of Pesticide Action Network North America, United Farm Workers of America, Californians for Pesticide Reform, Pesticide Watch Education Fund, Worksafe, Communities and Children Advocates Against Pesticide Poisoning and farmworkers Jose Hidalgo Ramon and Zeferino Estrada. The suit challenges the state Department of Pesticide Regulation’s (DPR) December 20 approval of methyl iodide for use in California on the grounds that it violates the California Environmental Quality Act, the California Birth Defects Prevention Act, and the Pesticide Contamination Prevention Act that protects groundwater against pesticide pollution. In addition, the suit contends that DPR violated the law requiring involvement of the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) in the development of farmworker […]

(Beyond Pesticides, December 7, 2010) Last week, Federal District Judge Jeffrey S. White issued a preliminary injunction ordering the immediate destruction of hundreds of acres of genetically engineered (GE) sugar beet seedlings planted in September after finding the seedlings had been planted in violation of federal law. The ruling comes in a lawsuit filed by Earthjustice and CFS on behalf of a coalition of farmers and conservation groups. The lawsuit was filed on September 9, shortly after the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) revealed it had allowed the seedlings to be planted. The court outlined the many ways in which GE sugar beets could harm the environment and consumers, noting that containment efforts were insufficient and past contamination incidents were “too numerous” to allow the illegal crop to remain in the ground. In his court order, Judge White noted, “Farmers and consumers would likely suffer harm from cross-contamination” between GE sugar beets and non-GE crops. He continued, “The legality of Defendants’ conduct does not even appear to be a close question,” noting that the government and Monsanto had tried to circumvent his prior ruling which made GE sugar beets illegal. Paul Achitoff of Earthjustice, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, said, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, November 22, 2010) The British Beekeepers’ Association (BBKA) last week announced plans to end its controversial practice of endorsing pesticides for financial benefit from leading chemical manufacturers. The endorsement of four products as “bee-friendly” caused outrage among many beekeepers because one of the companies, Bayer Crop Science, makes pesticides like imidacloprid, an insecticide widely implicated in the deaths of honeybees worldwide. The 135-year-old charity endorsed pesticides used to combat the varroa mite that is linked to the collapse of colonies as “bee-friendly.” In return, for the past 12 years the association has received £17,500 ($27,949) a year from Bayer Crop Sciences and Syngenta. This relationship angered many members and some left the association. However, the BBKA denies that it has bowed to pressure from members who have been increasingly critical of its relationship with Bayer and other chemical companies. In a statement sent out this week to the secretaries of local beekeeping associations across the UK, the BBKA’s president, Martin Smith, said: “Following discussion with the companies involved, the BBKA trustees have decided that endorsement and related product-specific payments will cease as soon as practically possible.” He added: “The four products subject to BBKA endorsement are of declining […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 18, 2010) Despite condemnation from environmentalists and human rights advocates, the business practices employed by biotech giant Monsanto seemed to be serving the St. Louis-based company well, until this year where disappointing sales, increased competition and even a federal investigation have sent stock prices into a downward spiral. Monsanto’s Roundup Ready corn, soy, and other crops have been engineered to resist the broad spectrum herbicide glyphosate, sold by Monsanto under the trade name Roundup. Monsanto holds the patent for its Roundup Ready seeds, meaning farmers must sign a contract with the company in order to purchase seeds, and are not allowed to save seeds to plant the following season. As seen in the recent documentary Food Inc., Monsanto has been ruthless in collecting royalties from growers. Despite Monsanto’s safety claims, glyphosate is actually very dangerous to human health and the environment. Glyphosate has been linked to cancers including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Acute exposure can lead to swelling of the eyes, face and joints; burning or itching, blisters rapid heart rate, chest pains and other symptoms. The California Department of Pesticide Regulation has found glyphosate to be the most common cause of pesticide-induced illness or injury. Glyphosate is also […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 20, 2010) Behind closed doors this past Monday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Bayer CropScience reached an agreement on a set of measures to gradually reduce and ultimately ban fully the use of the insecticde aldicarb in the U.S. This decision arrives on the heels of a revised risk assessment in which EPA found that babies and children under the age of five can ingest levels of the insecticide through food and drinking water at levels that exceed limits that the agency finds safe, and 25 years after 2,000 people fell ill after eating watermelons that were tainted with the pesticide. Though Beyond Pesticides applauds any decision to remove toxic chemicals from the environment, the problem with this cancellation, as with virtually all voluntary cancellations, is that the chemical can be legally used for years —eight years in this case — leaving open the opportunity for continued human and environmental exposure and harm. The decision was reached after EPA completed a revised risk assessment indicating that the pesticide does not meet the agency’s food safety standards. EPA scrutinized recent food consumption data from USDA to complete the risk assessment, which considered the percent of the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 17, 2010) A federal appeals court has revived the fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims by blueberry farmers in New Jersey, who say that a pesticide made by Novartis Crop Protection, Inc. reacted badly with fungicides and ruined their crops. Declaring that the lower court improperly dismissed the farmers’ state law claims as preempted by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the federal court concluded that farmers were not suing over the alleged flaws in the warning label-which is federally regulated -rather were complaining about misrepresentations in Novartis’ marketing brochure. The case, Indian Brand Farms Inc. v. Novartis Crop Protection Inc. was filed in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Jersey. Blueberry farmers said Novartis should have warned them that a new version of its pesticide, including diazinon as the active ingredient, also included a surfactant that reacts badly with fungicides. The promotional brochure failed to mention this reaction and when farmers mixed the diazinon pesticide with the fungicides Captan and Captec, it caused phytotoxic damage, including blotches, depressions and spots, and in some cases killed their plants. It was not clear to the appeals court that the practice of combining pesticides with […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 6, 2010) Organic farmers and gardeners across a Washington state county suspect that herbicide-contaminated manure and compost obtained from non-organic farms and dairies are responsible for severe crop loss reported throughout the region, raising questions about the adequacy of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) pesticide registration process. Tests of soil and tissue samples of local dairy manure that is used in soil and compost mixtures revealed small amounts of aminopyralid, a potent and persistent herbicide approved for use by EPA in 2005. Aminopyralid is generally used for weed control in pastures and fields that grow silage crops for dairy cows. When cows eat the grass that has been treated with the chemical, it passes through them unchanged and remains in their manure in concentrations that can still be high enough to damage broadleaf crops if the manure is used to fertilize them. Aminopyralid is produced by Dow AgroSciences, a subsidiary of Dow Chemical Co., and often manufactured under the product name Milestone. Former coordinator of the Washington State University master gardeners’ program Jill Cotton has noticed the damage in her garden and said reports continue to filter in from other gardens around the county. One Whatcom […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 3, 2010) A new study shows that due to a flaw in standard risk assessments, which consider toxic effects at fixed exposure times, the risks posed by the neonicotinoid pesticides imidacloprid and thiacloprid are likely to be underestimated. The authors believe that minute quantities of imidicloprid may be playing a much larger role in killing bees over extended periods of time than previously thought. The study, “The significance of the Druckrey—Küpfmüller equation for risk assessment””The toxicity of neonicotinoid insecticides to arthropods is reinforced by exposure time,” was published online July 23, 2010 in the journal Toxicology. The authors believe that standard risk assessment calculations underestimate toxicity because they do not accurately account for the interplay of time and level of exposure. According the study: The essence of the Druckrey—Küpfmüller equation states that the total dose required to produce the same effect decreases with decreasing exposure levels, even though the exposure times required to produce the same effect increase with decreasing exposure levels. Druckrey and Küpfmüller inferred that if both receptor binding and the effect are irreversible, exposure time would reinforce the effect. The Druckrey—Küpfmüller equation explains why toxicity may occur after prolonged exposure to very low toxicant […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 22, 2010) In a press release submitted last week, the Monsanto Company, Inc. announced that it has taken a vital step towards commercializing a new soybean product that is tolerant to the neurotoxic pesticide dicamba by completing its regulatory submission to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for dicamba-tolerant soybeans. Monsanto expects to complete regulatory submission to the USDA and key global markets in the coming months. The dicamba tolerance trait is expected to also be stacked with the glyphosate-resistant, or “Roundup Ready” soybean trait upon commercialization. While Monsanto claims that this is a “highly effective and economical weed control package,” it is likely to be similar to Roundup (glyphosate) Ready crops, just another way to sell more pesticide product. Monsanto is banking on the idea that mixing dicamba with glyphosate will help manage the hard-to-control broadleaf weeds in chemical-intensive farming systems, targeting both pre-plant and post-emergence weed control in an effort to reduce resistance. In a report published last year, analysts found that genetically engineered (GE) crops have been responsible for an increase of 383 million pounds of herbicide use in the U.S. over the first 13 years of commercial use of GE crops (1996-2008). The […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 15, 2010) Swiss chemical manufacturing giant Syngenta, one of the makers of the commonly used and heavily scrutinized pesticides atrazine, are speaking out against anti-pesticide activists and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) review of atrazine. Despite mounting peer-reviewed scientific literature and research, Syngenta refuses to acknowledge the dangers of atrazine and, according to Legal Newsline, claims that the review is “redundant,” and merely “an unprecedented war on agriculture by anti-pesticide activists.” The company, which made over $11 billion in sales in 2009 even accuses the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which has spearheaded a campaign to persuade EPA to initiate reviews, of being “slick” and “well-funded.” Other critics of the agency’s decision include the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), a group that has in the past received funding from Monsanto and Union Carbide (according to the group Center for Science in the Public Interest, ACSH stopped disclosing corporate donors in the early 1990’s). Dr. Gilbert Ross, medical director of ACSH told Legal Newswire that they believe EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson to be “cooperating with, if not spearheading, a broad-based activist agenda.” An article by The Huffington Post Investigative Fund published last week, however, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 14, 2010) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that Monsanto Company Inc. has agreed to pay a $2.5 million penalty to resolve misbranding violations related to the sale and distribution of cotton seed products containing genetically engineered (GE) pesticides. This is the largest civil administrative penalty settlement ever received under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). “This agreement shows that when a company violates the law by distributing misbranded pesticides, EPA will take action,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “The regulated community should understand that we take these violations seriously, and the public will accept nothing less than compliance.” “People who manufacture and distribute pesticide products must follow the federal registration requirements,” said Steve Owens, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. “These requirements are critical to preventing the development and spread of insect resistance.” Monsanto Bollgard and Bollgard II cotton seed products contain genetically engineered pesticides known as plant incorporated protectants (PIPs), which are registered as a pesticidal product under FIFRA. As a condition of the registrations, EPA included planting restrictions on Bollgard and Bollgard II, which contain the PIP Bacillus […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 23, 2010) The Supreme Court ruling in Monsanto v Geersten Seed Farms on June 21, 2010 appears to favor the St. Louis-based biotech giant, but may offer some protection from genetically engineered (GE) crops. In a 7 to 1 decision, the high court overturned a lower court injunction on the planting of GE alfalfa, yet planting the crop still remains illegal until USDA completes assessing its environmental review. Interestingly, Justice Steven G. Breyer recused himself because his brother District Judge Charles Breyer had issued the original ruling, while Justice Clarence Thomas did not recuse himself despite having worked as a Monsanto attorney for two years. In 2006, the Center for Food Safety (CFS) and several other farming and environmental groups, including Beyond Pesticides, filed suit on behalf of Geerston Seed Farms. The suit led to a U.S. District Court ruling that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) violated the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) by approving the sale of GE alfalfa without requiring an environmental impact statement (EIS). Monstanto was forced to stop selling the seed until a comprehensive EIS is prepared and assessed. A draft EIS was prepared in 2009. This was the first ever moratorium […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 14, 2010) Whole Foods Market is setting a good example for other retailers to follow in protecting consumers from fraudulent “organic” claims on health and beauty products. The national grocery retailer of natural and organic products announced earlier this month that all cosmetic and personal care products sold at their stores with the word “organic” on the product label must comply with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Organic Program (NOP) or NSF 305 standards, meaning that the product must be third-party certified to USDA organic standards or front label “organic” claims must cease, according to the Organic Consumers Association. Thought the term “organic” on all products, whether for food or non-food items, meant that it was certified? That’s the law, but sometimes not the reality. The reality is that the USDA’s NOP requires certification for all “organic” claims on food products, but does not currently have similar certification requirements in place for non-food items. The new Whole Foods Market policy states, “We believe that the ‘organic’ claim used on personal care products should have very similar meaning to the ‘organic’ claim used on food products, which is currently regulated by the USDA’s National Organic Program. […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 8, 2010) An Indian court in Bhopal, India, capital of Madhya Pradesh, found chemical company Union Carbide guilty of negligence and convicted eight former senior employees for their role in the world’s worst industrial disaster that killed thousands. The verdict came 25 years after the Union Carbide gas-leak and included a sentence that many victims of the accident protested was too light. According to Reuters, the defendants were charged with “death by negligence” and sentenced for two years in prison and a fine of 100,000 rupees ($2,175). The court also fined the former Indian unit of Union Carbide 500,000 rupees ($10,600). The Central Board of Investigation initially charged 12 defendants with culpable homicide, which would have carried a sentence of up to 10 years, but the Indian Supreme Court reduced these charges in 1996. Many victims and activists found the light sentence, “an insult”, and Sandhna Kamik of the Bhopal Gas Victims Struggle group protested, “Even with the guilty judgment, what does two years punishment mean? They will be able to appeal against the judgment in higher courts.” Survivors, relatives and activists gathered in protest with signs saying “hang the guilty” and “traitors of the nation” and […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 3, 2010) City lawmakers in Albany, New York want to strengthen an 11-year-old ban on the use of some pesticides on city land after the revelation last week that one such banned chemical was sprayed near a local playground earlier this month. Albany’s Parks and Recreation Commissioner John D’Antonio said last Friday he was unaware of the ban, passed by the council in 1998, until he began researching a recent citizen complaint. The city is now rethinking its use of pesticides and exploring why the ban on city use of pesticides dubbed most toxic by the federal government was not more widely known. The law also required departments using less toxic pesticides to annually report plans to phase them out to the Common Council. TruGreen, a city contractor, used Trupower 3 Selective Herbicide, which is a mixture of 2,4-D, mecoprop-p and dicamba, and is listed in Toxicity Category 1 (most toxic) by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) — causing potentially irreversible eye damage, but is also toxic if ingested and can be irritating to the skin. The herbicide has been banned from city land, except in rare circumstances, since 1999. Under the same ordinance, all city agencies […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 2, 2010) After decades-long litigation over the use of the toxic pesticide dibromochloropropane, or DBCP, in the 1970’s which has been linked to sterility and has since been banned, Dole Food Co. is proposing new settlements for farm workers claiming they were injured by exposure to the pesticide. A request has been filed by lawyers for Dole in the Los Angeles Superior Court asking that nearly 1,500 Honduran farm workers who are suing Dole be allowed to drop out of those suits and settle their claims out of court under an existing program arranged by the company and Honduran government officials. This could potentially end years of legal action inexpensively for Dole while providing compensation to workers quickly, however some people view this plan as a way for the company to back out of its responsibilities to former plantation workers. The pesticide DBCP was used by workers from Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, and Panama to kill worm infestations in the trees’ roots. In the U.S., DBCP was used as a soil fumigant and nematocide on over 40 different crops until 1977. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), DBCP causes male reproductive problems, including low […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 26, 2010) Beyond Pesticides has drafted sample text (see below), and we need your help to deliver a letter to your local supermarket, cosmetics store or co-op asking them to stop selling products that contain triclosan. Hundreds of products containing the antibacterial chemical triclosan decorate the shelves of retail stores across the country. From hand soap and toothpastes, to toys and yoga mats, triclosan is everywhere. Product labels will read “triclosan,” “triclocarban” (a related compound found in bar soaps) or “Microban” (a formulation of triclosan used in plastics and fabrics). It is time to take action and demand that this endocrine disrupting chemical is removed from the products we use and love. When consumers demand more for their health and well-being, retailers and manufacturers of triclosan products must listen. Triclosan, which has a similar chemical structure as dioxin, is linked to various health and environmental problems. It is associated with skin irritation, has been shown to interfere with the body’s hormones, and has been linked to an increased risk of developing respiratory illness, or asthma, and cancer, as well as subtle effects on learning ability. Because the chemical goes down the drain, it wreaks havoc with the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 14, 2010) As the current economic climate forces spending cuts on health benefits, salaries, and bonuses, many companies are offering their employees a trendy new perk: an organic corporate garden. The New York Times reports that dozens of companies from various industries have started or plan to start organic gardens for their employees. Employees may spend a few lunch breaks planting, weeding, and watering, in exchange for all the fresh beans, tomatoes, and zucchini they want. Some of these gardens also supply the company cafeteria, or the local food bank. Companies have put container gardens on rooftops, converted former smoking areas, or simply dug into the office park lawns. In some cases employees lobbied for a garden in others it was a manager that decided to create one. It may come as no surprise that famously progressive companies such as Google have created gardens for its employees but more traditional companies have also joined in the trend. PepsiCo, the $60 billion manufacturer of highly processed products, including Mountain Dew, Amp Energy Drink, Doritos, and Cap’n Crunch, has created an organic garden a five minute walk from corporate headquarters in Purchase, New York. The garden at Kohl’s Department […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 27, 2010) On April 22, 2010, Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) introduced H.R.5124, legislation to prohibit the use, production, sale, importation, or exportation of any pesticide containing atrazine. The bill’s introduction coincides with an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) meeting this week to reevaluate the human health effects of the popular endocrine disrupting herbicide. Environmentalists point to the 2003-2006 reregistration of atrazine as a prime example of the broken system of pesticide regulation in the U.S. and call on EPA to reassess atrazine fairly and for consumers to support an end to all unnecessary pesticide use by supporting organic whenever possible. “On this 40th Anniversary of Earth Day, I can think of no better tribute to our planet and our people than protecting it from known harmful chemicals,” Rep. Ellison said. “No one should ever have to worry if the water they drink is making them sick or preventing fertility.” Rep. Ellison’s bill cites widespread environmental contamination, health and environmental effects, as well as bans in other countries, as justification for the ban. The current SAP meeting follows EPA’s October 2009 announcement that it would begin a new evaluation of atrazine to determine its effects […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 23, 2010) In recognition of the 40th anniversary of Earth Day, the Dow Chemical Company is a proud sponsor of the Dow Live Earth Run for Water. Yes, that Dow Chemical Company. The same company that manufactures some of the most hazardous pesticides in the world, that was responsible for Agent Orange, and that is liable for the worst industrial disaster of all time is sponsoring what it calls the “largest solutions-based initiative aimed at solving the global water crisis in history.” The series of events held in various cities on April 18 consisted of 6 kilometer runs, concerts and “water education activities.” The Bravo TV network will broadcast a one hour special on Friday April 23 “offering audiences an inside look at the global event and its mission to help solve the world water crisis.” When Environmental Action planned the first Earth Day in 1970 at a cost of $125,000, it accepted no money from corporations. Some 20 million Americans from across the country participated in the day’s marches, demonstrations, lectures, workshops, and other events, making it one of the most successful political events in American History. Since that time, many companies have started making donations […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 20, 2010) Communities from six states filed a lawsuit last month in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois against Swiss chemical giant Syngenta AG and its American counterpart Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc., the makers of Atrazine. The 16 municipalities in the states of Kansas, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Missouri, and Iowa want Syngenta to pay for the expensive carbon filters needed to remove atrazine from their drinking water supply. The United States’ largest private water utility, American Water Company, has also joined the suit, representing 28 additional communities. Atrazine is used to control broad leaf weeds and annual grasses in crops, golf courses, and even residential lawns. It is used extensively for broad leaf weed control in corn. The herbicide does not cling to soil particles, but washes into surface water or leaches into groundwater, and then finds its way into municipal drinking water. It has been linked to a myriad of health problems in humans including disruption of hormone activity, birth defects, and cancer. Atrazine is also a major threat to wildlife. It harms the immune, hormone, and reproductive systems of aquatic animals. Fish and amphibians exposed to atrazine can exhibit hermaphrodism. Male […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 14, 2010) A new report shows that the large-scale cultivation of genetically engineered (GE) corn is causing the spread of a new pest in the US Corn Belt. The report, “The spread of the western bean cutworm causes massive damage in the US” published by Testbiotech for Greenpeace Germany finds that GE corn plants in the U.S. that have been genetically modified to express the Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) toxin classified as Cry1Ab are being infested by the larvae of the western bean cutworm (Striacosta albicosta). According to Testbiotech, a research based non-profit organization operating out of Germany, this new pest has been caused by the large-scale cultivation of genetically engineered plants expressing Cry1Ab such as MON810 (sold as YieldGard by company of Monsanto). The infestation has been observed since 2000, and the western bean cutworm is emerging as a new plant pest. Historically, this species of cutworm has been confined to very limited regions and did not cause any major problems in maize crops. However, for the past several years the pest has been spreading into more and more regions within the US Corn Belt causing substantial economic damage. Maize plants affected by the western bean cutworm […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 12, 2010) Environmental, public health, labor and farmworker advocacy organizations from across the country have filed a petition asking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to rescind the Bush administration era approval of the highly toxic fumigant pesticide methyl iodide in light of troubling new findings uncovered in California studies. The petition was submitted on the birthday of famed farmworker rights advocate Cesar Chavez, who drew national attention to pesticide misuse on grapes in the 1980s. “In 1988, Cesar Chavez again put his life on the line to draw attention to farmworker rights when he protested the use of pesticides with a 36-day, water-only fast,” said Jeannie Economos, Pesticide Safety and Environmental Health Project Coordinator at Farmworker Association of Florida. “Over 20 years later, we should not have to be fighting the same battles. Methyl iodide use takes us in the dead wrong direction for workers, public health and the future of agriculture.” The movement to ban methyl iodide follows the legacy of Cesar Chavez: the pesticide poses significant, direct risks to farmworkers, their families and neighboring communities. Methyl iodide is a water contaminant, nervous system poison, thyroid toxicant and is listed on California’s Proposition 65 list […]