(Beyond Pesticides, October 30, 2008) In an effort to keep its popular yet toxic herbicide 2,4-D on the market, Dow AgroSciences has filed a notice with the Canadian government claiming that Quebec’s ban on cosmetic use of pesticides breaches legal protections under the North American Free Trade Act (NAFTA). The company is likely to pursue compensation from Canada’s federal government under Chapter 11 of NAFTA, which restricts a country from taking measures “tantamount to nationalization or expropriation” of an investment. Despite the threat of legal action, Ontario, which instituted restrictions similar to Quebec’s earlier this year, says it will go ahead with its ban. Public health and environmental advocates have raised concerns that companies are using NAFTA to prevent governments from taking actions to regulate pollution and health threats, and they also warn that the companies’ actions may have a serious public backlash. Chapter 11 of NAFTA is just one of the legal avenues pesticide manufacturers have to make stricter pesticide regulation cumbersome, expensive, and in some cases impossible. For example, 41 states in the U.S. have preemption laws that prohibit municipal authorities from creating pesticide regulation that is more restrictive than the state’s. In a statement that could equally […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 7, 2008) After months of grassroots pressure by the Genetic Engineering Policy Project, Center for Food Safety and others, Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 541, The Food and Farm Protection Act, on September 27, 2008. Under this law, farmers that are unknowingly contaminated by genetically engineered (GE) crops in California are now protected from liability. Monsanto, which has aggressively litigated to protect its seed patents, must now use a protocol to investigate farmers and sample their crops under legal standards that require notification. “We’re pleased to see that this bill will give farmers new protections from legal implications related to GE crops,” said Rebecca Spector, West Coast Director for Center for Food Safety. “While it is a compromise, it’s still an important step in the right direction.” AB 541 protects California farmers who have not been able to prevent the inevitable – the drift of GE pollen or seed onto their land and the subsequent contamination of non-GE crops. Farmers with crops that become contaminated by patented seeds or pollen have been the target of lawsuits brought by biotech patent holders, most notably Monsanto. Further, if their contaminated crops cause harm to other farmers, the environment or consumers, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 3, 2008) Activists and individuals concerned about misleading claims on pesticide labeling scored a victory on Wednesday when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) withdrew its draft notice on label statements regarding cause marketing and third-party endorsements. After a two-year process of EPA proposals and public comment periods, the agency has determined that such label statements do nothing to promote “consumer understanding” of the risks and applications of pesticide products, and will not be encouraging further submissions. In its notice, EPA writes, “The Agency agrees that cause marketing claims and third-party endorsements as outlined in the draft PR Notice generally would not contribute meaningfully to improving protection of human health and the environment. The addition of such statements is not likely to enhance users’ ability to understand the labeling required to inform the user about how to use the product safely and effectively. In fact, the addition of such statements could interfere with that goal. In addition, EPA recognizes that its resources are limited and should be targeted towards activities that will enhance the level of protection of human health and environment from pesticides.” In 2006, The Clorox Company submitted an application to EPA to add cause marketing […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 26, 2008) On September 24, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Ivory Coast farmworkers’ claims that they were victims of genocide when pesticide exposure made them sterile. The nearly 700 plaintiffs were exposed to the soil fumigant and nematocide 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane, or DBCP, while working on Dole Food Company farms in Africa. The original First Amended Complaint was filed on April 6, 2007, and despite the latest setback, the Africans’ attorney, Raphael Metzger, said he would pursue a rehearing. Until 1977, DBCP was widely used in U.S. agriculture, when it was banned for all uses except pineapples. In contrast, DBCP was widely used for fruit production in developing countries in to the 1990s in spite of its U.S. regulatory status. “The manufacturers continued making money on [DBCP] by shipping it to Third World countries where farmworkers were given it to use,” Mr. Metzger said. The suit, Abagninin v. Amvac Chemical Co, was filed under the Alien Torts Statute and contended “that such conduct supports claims under the ATS for genocide and crimes against humanity because the conduct was undertaken with knowledge of DBCP’s effects and pursuant to a State or organizational policy.” The court rejected Abagninin’s […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 11, 2008) The North Carolina Pesticide Board has begun hearing evidence in a case from 2004 over suspected pesticide violations that were investigated after three female Ag-Mart farmworkers gave birth to babies with severe birth defects. In 2006, the family of Carlos Herrera Candelario, who was born without arms or legs, sued Ag-Mart over illegal pesticide exposure resulting in the boy’s birth defects. The case was settled out of court, with Ag-Mart agreeing to pay the medical expenses of the boy for life and provide him with a permanent income, but insisting that the settlement was not an admission of guilt. The current hearing will look at whether Ag-Mart’s farm manager, Jeff Oxley, is indeed guilty of over 200 violations, including forcing workers into the field too soon after dangerous pesticides were applied. The hearing is significant because the company insists that adequate practices are and have been in place to ensure workers are not exposed to pesticides, even though the testimony of Ag-Mart employees runs counter to this claim. This hearing could do a great deal to elucidate the truth about farmworker pesticide exposure, an important issue for the thousands of workers who plant and harvest […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 5, 2008) On the night of August 28, a pesticide waste tank exploded at Bayer’s Institute, West Virginia plant. One worker was killed, another injured, and the blast was heard in Mink Shoals, more than ten miles away. Despite individual accounts of the resulting air pollution, Bayer officials assured the public that no chemicals had escaped the plant. An investigation of Bayer’s safety history and the area’s emergency response reveals a shaky safety record.. The tank involved in the explosion contained waste products from the production of Bayer’s insecticide, thiodicarb, which is banned in the European Union. Included in those were methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK), hexane, methomyl, and dimethyl disulfide, all of which are acutely toxic to humans. According to chief of homeland security and emergency response for the state Department of Environmental Protection, Mike Dorsey, “The thing that blew up was the least dangerous of the stuff that’s there.” Jeannie Young, who lives near the plant, said that following the blast, “My daughter and I have headaches.” When taking her dogs outside half an hour following the explosion, “They acted really funny. They wanted to come right back in the house.” In spite of a noticeable […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 4, 2008) On September 2, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a nationwide ban on the planting of genetically-engineered (GE) Roundup Ready alfalfa pending a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Court determined that the planting of genetically modified alfalfa can result in potentially irreversible harm to organic and conventional varieties of crops, damage to the environment, and economic harm to farmers. Beyond Pesticides is a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit. Although the suit (Geertson Seed Farms, et al. v. Johanns) was brought against U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forage Genetics and Monsanto entered into the suit as Defendant-Intervenors. In her opinion, Circuit Judge Mary M. Schroeder held that, “Monsanto and Forage Genetics contend that the District Court disregarded their financial losses, but the district court considered those economic losses and simply concluded that the harm to growers and consumers who wanted non-genetically engineered alfalfa outweighed the financial hardships to Monsanto and Forage Genetics and their growers.” “This ruling affirms a major victory for consumers, ranchers, organic farmers, and most conventional farmers across the country,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety, lead plaintiff and counsel in the lawsuit. […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 28, 2008) The German Coalition Against Bayer Dangers has filed legal action in Germany against Bayer for its role in marketing insecticides that the coalition believes company officials knew were toxic to honey bees. The suit follows recent action by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to force the agency into compliance with its Freedom of Information Act request for scientific studies relating to clothianidin, one of the Bayer-manufactured pesticides tied to bee toxicity. In May, Germany suspended the approval of eight pesticides linked to a massive bee die-off. Six of the eight suspended are manufactured by Bayer, the other two by Syngenta. Two of the primary active ingredients of concern are clothianidin and imidacloprid, both in the neonicotinoid family of chemicals. They are systemic pesticides, meaning the chemical is incorporated into plant tissue and can therefore be present in pollen and nectar, which is of particular importance to bees. They also have long persistence in the soil and can be absorbed by multiple generations of crops, increasing the likelihood of exposure for bees. Attorney Harro Schultze, who represents the Coalition Against Bayer Dangers said, “The public prosecutor [in Germany] needs […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 21, 2008) As the debate over how to solve the global food crisis heats up, experts criticize many in the mainstream media for promoting pesticides and genetically engineered seeds as solutions to global hunger. In a recent critique, Francis Moore Lappe, author of the famous book Diet for a Small Planet and co-founder of Food First and the Small Planet Institute, says the media, in this case NPR, are off the mark in identifying the underlying causes of the food crisis and fail to look at the hopeful stories of farming communities that are succeeding with agro-ecological methods. Ms. Lappe writes, “On every continent one can find empowered rural communities developing GM-free, agro-ecological farming systems. They’re succeeding: the largest overview study, looking at farmers transitioning to sustainable practices in 57 countries, involving almost 13 million small farmers on almost 100 million acres, found after four years that average yields were up 79 percent.” As an example, she points to what may be the “pesticide capital of the world,” Andhra Pradesh, India,where “pests developed insecticide resistance and genetically modified (GM) cotton failed to live up to Monsanto’s promises.” After significant crop losses and farmer suicides there, many communities […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 5, 2008) Under pressure from activists and shareholders to change its chemical dependent lawn care practices, TruGreen””the world’s largest lawn and landscape care company, has joined the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program (PESP). Although the voluntary move comes with a pledge to reduce pesticide use, the company’s reformed practices will still fall short of organic land care, which does not utilize toxic pesticides and synthetic fertilizers. Organic land care is effective, affordable and better for human health and the environment, but TruGreen has failed to commit to organic methods. The PESP is a voluntary program started in 1994. According to the EPA, “By joining PESP, organizations pledge that environmental stewardship is an integral part of pest management, and they commit to working toward innovative practices that reduce risk to human health and the environment.” One of the benefits of joining the PESP for companies, according to the EPA website, is that “Membership may enhance public perception of your organization, constituent support, and employee morale.” Underneath this enticement to join is the clear potential for “greenwashing,” or the promotion of a product or service as environmentally friendly when the veracity of such claims is dubious. […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 9, 2008) High food prices, climate change and increasing concern over fresh water supplies are helping to fuel interest in new genetically modified (GM) technology in the European Union (EU), which has long been wary of foods derived from tinkering with the genetic make-up of plants. The European Commission has said it believes GM crops can alleviate the current crisis in food supply, although it added in June that expediency should not overrule strict scientific scrutiny of the use of GM technology. A European Commission-sponsored Eurobarometer opinion poll last month showed a slight increase in knowledge and acceptance of the technology. New consumer interests in GM seed varieties, which are likely to be more resistant to drought and able to produce reasonable yields with significantly less water, have increased. In a similar opinion poll conducted in March, the number of EU respondents saying they lacked information on GMs fell to 26 percent, compared with 40 percent in the previous, 2005 survey.  Fifty-eight percent were apprehensive about GM use and just 21 percent in favor, down from 26 percent in favor in a 2006. The European Union has not approved any GM crops for a decade and the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 1, 2008) On behalf of the African American residents of Mossville, Louisiana, the non-profit, public interest law firm Advocates for Environmental Human Rights (AEHR) on June 23, 2008 filed with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) a detailed account of the human rights abuses suffered by residents as a consequence of governmental approvals that allow industrial facilities to dump millions of pounds of toxic chemicals every year. The filing is an amended petition (Petition No. P-242-05), which includes a response to the U.S. Government’s arguments that attempt to defend its flawed environmental regulatory system that perpetuates environmental racism and denies basic human rights in Mossville and other similarly situated communities of color, according to AEHR. The petition states: “[The residents of] Mossville suffer from severe health problems, elevated levels of cancer-causing and hormone-disrupting chemicals, a devastated environment, and a deteriorated quality of life, all of which arise from governmental approvals of highly toxic industrial development in and around Mossville. The United States government and its political subdivisions have authorized fourteen industrial facilities to manufacture, process, store, and discharge toxic and hazardous substances in close geographic proximity to Mossville residents. Three of these facilities — an oil […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 25, 2008) Pesticides manufactured by Bayer (Germany), Syngenta (Switzerland), Monsanto (USA), BASF (Germany) and Dow Chemical (USA) pose the biggest threat to human health and the environment, according to a new Greenpeace Germany report, “The Dirty Portfolios of the Pesticides Industry.” The report provides the first-ever ranking of the world’s leading agrochemical companies based on the hazards and risks of their pesticides on human health and the environment. These five companies together account for 75 percent of the world market and 46 percent of the pesticides they sell worldwide are particularly hazardous substances. Monsanto has the portfolio with the highest proportion, 60 percent, of pesticides that are particularly toxic to humans and the environment. However, Monsanto only ends up in the middle of the overall ranking due to its small share of the market. The overall ranking not only takes into account the hazardous properties of the various pesticides, but also the quantities that are sold worldwide. Pesticides manufactured by Bayer pose the biggest threat to human health and the environment, according to the report. “Our ranking shows how toxic the business of the leading agrochemical companies still is,” said Greenpeace chemicals expert Manfred Krautter. “Politicians must […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 5, 2008) While the Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) High Level Conference on Food Security in Rome convenes June 3-5, 2008, some nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are trying to shed light on the fact that as hundreds of millions of people throughout the world are hungry, agrochemical companies that make pesticides and genetically engineered seeds are making record profits. Although UN chief Ban Ki-moon has declared the summit a success with “a clear sense of resolve, shared responsibility and political commitment among member states to making the right policy choices and investing in agriculture in the years to come,” many NGOs fear that the policies will only continue in the model of the green revolution, which ushered in the widespread use of pesticides and fertilizers in farming. This model favors large agrochemical companies that manufacture pesticides and genetically engineered seeds and perpetuates the environmental and social devastation that goes hand in hand with industrial agriculture. The Food Summit in Rome follows the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science, and Technology for Development (IAASTD) (also sponsored by the FAO) conference held in April of this year, which stressed the importance of agroecological and organic approaches to farming in order […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 2, 2008) Residential properties in Saginaw, Michigan contain unacceptably high levels of dioxin contamination, according to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5. Soil from the Riverside Boulevard area, a neighborhood along the Lower Tittabawassee River and downstream from the Dow Chemical Company’s manufacturing plant, was recently sampled and analyzed by EPA and evaluated in collaboration with Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and the Michigan Department of Community Health. Past waste disposal practices, fugitive emissions and incineration at the plant have resulted in on- and off-site contamination of nearby waterways. Dow’s manufacturing of chlorine-based products and other chemicals results in dioxins, as well as furans, chlorobenzenes and heavy metals, as byproducts. According to the Chicago Tribune, soil samples “from one yard was 23 times higher than what the EPA considers reasonable safe.” Former administrator for EPA’s Region 5, Mary Gade, had been aggressively pushing Dow to properly cleanup the area, until she was forced out, states the Chicago Tribune. Dow’s previous dioxin cleanup of the 300 residences included cleaning inside the homes and laying wood chips over the contaminated soil around the homes, which is believed to be ineffective in protecting people and wildlife from dioxin […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 23, 2008) In the midst of dramatically declining bee populations, the German Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety (BVD) has suspended the approval of eight toxic insecticides believed to be responsible for the fate of these important pollinators. The suspended products include pesticides containing imidacloprid and clothianidin, the majority of which are produced by Bayer Company and have been suspected for years of contributing to declining bee populations.France banned the use of imidacloprid on corn and sunflowers in 1999, and rejected Bayer’s application for clothianidin this year. Despite the call for prohibition of imidacloprid from German apiarists and environmental groups as early as 2004, a crisis in bee populations–a reported 50-60% loss, finally forced the government to take action. The U.S., where these products are still approved for use, has also been experiencing extremely alarming rates of bee colony collapse, while areas away from cropland have thriving bee populations. Imidacloprid and clothianidin are both neonicotinoids, meaning that they target nerve cells in a similar way to nicotine, acting as neurotoxins to sucking insects such as beetles and aphids. Clothianidin was approved for use in the U.S. in 2003 as a seed treatment for corn and canola, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 29, 2008) In the wake of provincial laws banning lawn chemicals, the Canadian division of Home Depot announced on April 22, 2008 that it will stop selling traditional pesticides in its stores across Canada by the end of 2008 and will increase its selection of environmentally friendly alternatives. Home Depot Canada is the first major home improvement retailer to stop selling pesticides nationwide.The decision coincides with legislation introduced on April 23, which bans the sale and cosmetic use of pesticides on lawns, gardens and parks in the Canadian province of Ontario. Quebec passed a similar ban in 2003. Additionally, there are currently over 55 municipalities in Canada where the residential use, but not sale, of pesticides is banned. Other garden supply and grocery stores have also stopped selling pesticides in Ontario and Quebec, but the Home Depot decision will affect stores nationwide. Environmental and public health activists believe the provincial bans and Home Depot phase-outs demonstrate that the country has reached a tipping point. “I would say that now that we have Quebec and Ontario, there is huge pressure on the other provinces. The next obvious one would be British Columbia.” Gideon Forman, executive director of the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 25, 2008)  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5 this week issued a “stop sale, use or removal” order against Scotts Miracle Gro Co. and three affiliates, all of Marysville, Ohio, for illegal, unregistered and misbranded weed and fertilizer products with a cancer causing and endocrine disrupting pesticide ingredient. EPA will also issue a stop sale order to Scotts Lawn Care Service.Scotts has agreed to recall two products from all retail locations across the United States and to set up a process for consumers to safely return any unregistered products they may have purchased. EPA ordered the companies, collectively an international producer and distributor of lawn care products, to immediately stop selling and distributing the products which can be identified by the invalid “EPA registration number” listed on the package. Invalid registration number 62355-4 is marketed under names including “Garden Weed Preventer + Plant Food” and “Miracle Gro Shake ‘n’ Feed All Purpose Plant Food Plus Weed Preventer.” The active ingredient of this product is trifluralin, an herbicide that is a possible carcinogen and probable endocrine disruptor, among its health effects. Invalid registration number 538-304 is used primarily by Scotts Lawn Service, a lawn care company. It […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 28, 2008) Three years ago, Carlos Candelario was born without arms or legs and with spinal and lung deformities, birth defects caused by his mother’s exposure to multiple pesticides while working in Ag-Mart Produce fields during her pregnancy. His parents, Francisca Herrera and Abraham Candelario, sued the company in 2006, and last week’s settlement will provide for Carlos for the rest of his life, pending a judge’s approval. “I am as gratified about this case as any I’ve ever handled,” said attorney Andrew Yaffa. “This child has tremendous needs and needed somebody willing to speak on his behalf. Every medical need will be taken care of as a result of this settlement.” Ag-Mart has a history of state pesticide violations and use of extremely toxic pesticides (although in 2005, the company did agree to discontinue use of chemicals linked to reproductive risks, excepting methyl bromide, which is still in use). The company grows “UglyRipe” heirloom tomatoes and Santa Sweets grape tomatoes in a chemical-intensive operation. Ms. Herrera and Mr. Candelario worked alongside other migrant workers in North Carolina and Florida fields at the time of Ms. Herrera’s exposure. Both Florida and North Carolina have published reports on […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 26, 2008) The sowing of gene-altered corn, called MON810, in France this spring will not be allowed until further scientific evidence on its safety is reviewed. This ruling came after growers argued that they faced serious economic harm if the ban on genetically modified crops was not immediately released before the start of the spring planting season. The French Conseil d’État last week upheld the ban instituted February 7 of this year, after concerns were raised by French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, on the heath and environmental benefits of genetically modified (GM) crops. In the ruling, presiding Judge Jean-Marie Delarue pointed out that the safety of the product needs further study. The ban would therefore be upheld until a ruling could be made on the scientific underpinning. Hearings are expected to be held in the coming months. The French Ministry of Agriculture initially imposed the ban on GM products, stating that it should remain in place until European authorities completed a review of the product. Review is required every ten years. Efforts to overturn the ban were led by the General Association of Maize Growers in France and several biotechnology companies, including Monsanto, which engineered MON810, and Pioneer, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 21, 2008) Will this be the pesticide label of the near future? It will be unless you act now to stop cause marketing on toxic pesticide products. Send your comments to EPA by Thursday, March 27, 2008 and oppose cause marketing on toxic pesticide products. See Take Action webpage. On October 31, 2007, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) opened a comment period on their Draft Guidance for Pesticide Registrants on Label Statements Regarding Third-Party Endorsements and Cause Marketing Claims. After being urged by Beyond Pesticides and other concerned groups, EPA extended the closing date from December 28 to March 27. Your opportunity to provide EPA with critical feedback on its proposal to allow third-party endorsements on pesticide labels ends in less than a week! Cause marketing on pesticide labels would allow manufacturers to place the symbols of well-known organizations to their products, such as in the deal Clorox made with the American Red Cross last year. Attaching an image (like the Red Cross symbol) to a label can imply false safety of a product, which is a direct violation of EPA’s own labeling law. EPA’s proposed law would allow any company to make similar partnerships, putting consumers […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 15, 2008) Two studies have just been released, one by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA), a promoter of genetically-engineering crops,  and the other by the Center for Food Safety (CFS) and Friends of the Earth, each with differing conclusions on the impact of genetically engineered (GE) crops on the health of our food systems. The debate is one that has existed for years, particularly as GE seeds have spread worldwide, now accounting for 280 million acres of cropland in 23 countries. Reports have historically provided significant documentation of herbicide-resistant weeds developing as a result of heavy reliance on the chemicals crops are bred to tolerate. Insect resistance has also been recently discovered. Legislators have recognized the need to protect farmers from GE contamination and resulting lawsuits from seed developer Monsanto. Concerns over a litany of health and environmental risks from GE crops continue. The timing of these two studies highlights the disparity between how the GE industry represents its product and how public interest groups evaluate the effects and risks they see to farmers and consumers alike. The ISAAA study, entitled Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2007, celebrates the first twelve […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 24, 2008) The first state bill on genetically engineered (GE) crops passed through its first committee in February, 2007, and the latest revision is scheduled for a hearing tomorrow, January 24. While AB 541 has been pared down considerably from its first and most progressive incarnation, it includes two very important measures to protect farmers whose crops are contaminated by nearby GE fields. The first provision states, “A farmer is not liable for the breach of a seed contract or for patent infringement if a product, in which the seed labeler, or patent holder or licensee, has rights, is possessed by the farmer or found on real property owned or occupied by the farmer and the presence of the product is de minimis or not intended by the farmer.” A frequent criticism of Monsanto and the company’s overwhelming market share of seed is its tendency to sue farmers who did not plant GE seed, but whose fields were contaminated by a neighbor’s GE variety. In a 2005 report by the Center for Food Safety, Executive Director Andrew Kimbrell said, “These lawsuits and settlements are nothing less than corporate extortion of American Farmers.” (See Daily News from January […]