(Beyond Pesticides, August 27, 2008) Citing the possibility of lower crop yields and higher food prices, government ministers in the United Kingdom are planning to step up pressure on the European Parliament in opposition to plans to ban the most hazardous pesticides, amounting to three quarters of the pesticides used by farmers in the European Union. Environmental campaigners, like the UK Pesticides Campaign, are adamant that a crackdown on the use of pesticides is needed to protect public health and believe that the new measures must not be watered down by industry lobbying. Officials from the U.K. Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) believe that the ban would remove important pesticides from the market. Those arguing against the proposal say it could prevent the use of certain fungicides and result in substantially lower wheat yields, postulating a 30 percent reduction from current levels. DEFRA officials claim that the ban would have “significant adverse impact on crop protection, but secure no significant health benefits for consumers.” British Farming Minister Lord Rooker is adamant that fungicides should not be banned before alternatives are approved and is urging other European countries to block the measure. The controversy centers on the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 22, 2008) The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is accepting comments on letters sent from the Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) requesting that EPA revoke all tolerances for the toxic pesticide endosulfan. In addition, EPA is accepting information on endosulfan residues on commodities consumed by Alaskan natives. PANNA’s August 12 letter stated: “We are particularly concerned about the effects of endosulfan on prenatal and child development. Peer-reviewed science demonstrates that endosulfan is both an endocrine disruptor and a neurotoxicant.” The letter followed up on a February 2008 petition signed by 13,300 people across the country, a legal petition filed by the National Resources Defense Council that same month, three letters sent to the Agency on May 19, 2008 signed by 111 nonprofit environmental groups, 55 scientists, and 5 coalitions of Indigenous groups and tribes, and a lawsuit filed on behalf of PAN, environmental and farmworker groups on July 24. “Endosulfan poses a threat to the health of children in the U.S.,” the letter concluded. “This antiquated DDT-era organochlorine has already been phased out of agriculture in the European Union and at least 20 other countries. It is high time for the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 14, 2008) The first report released by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as a result of a lawsuit (NCAP et al. v. NMFS, No. 07-1791 RSL) settlement reveal “overwhelming evidence” to suggest that the pesticides chlorpyrifos, malathion, and diazinon increase the chance of extinction for protected salmon and steelhead. The report on the three pesticides and their effects on threatened fish is the first in what is expected to be a four year review process of 37 pesticides. “These are pesticides that EPA [the Environmental Protection Agency] has swept under the rug for years. These are three that stood out as the nastiest of the (pesticides) that are still in widespread use,” said Joshua Osborne-Klein, an attorney for Earthjustice who represented the plaintiff, Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP). The 377-page report is clear in its conclusion that current use patterns of these three toxic pesticides threaten the salmon and steelhead protected by the Endangered Species Act, but it does not delineate the next steps to reduce the risk. A report on mitigation measures, which could include restrictions or bans, is expected in the next few months. The timing of the report coincides with other […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 7, 2008) In a move antithetical to the precautionary principle, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has decided to extend the tolerance exemptions on certain inert ingredients in pesticides until further studies on their possible health effects have been performed. A decision in 2006 announced that tolerance exemptions on the listed inerts would be revoked as of August, 2008. However, pesticide producers put pressure on the agency to extend this deadline, and the agency complied, extending the date to August 2009. Environmental and public health organizations advocate for stricter controls and more transparency regarding inert ingredients. Because inerts are not “active” ingredients, they do not have to appear on label and are considered proprietary information on the part of the manufacturers. However, their supposed inactivity or inertness belies the fact that these ingredients frequently pose serious health risks of their own, and commonly make up the majority of the volume of a pesticide. One such example is that of the herbicide Roundup, for which the primary inert ingredient was found to be highly toxic to amphibians (for full story, read Daily News of September 12, 2005). The announcement in the Federal Register states, “EPA developed voluntary guidance describing […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 1, 2008) The Oregon Department of Agriculture has released the 2007 Pesticide Use Reporting System (PURS) annual report, summarizing data collected last year -making it the first report to include information from a mandatory electronic reporting of pesticide use statewide. The requirement to report online applies to anyone using a registered pesticide or pest control product in the course of business, for a government entity, or in a public place. The 2007 annual report also includes data from a household pesticide use survey. The release comes nine years after being authorized by the state legislature, due to debate over funding and scope of the report. The required reporting is also set to expire in 2009, requiring activists to lobby for continuation of the program. For 2007, there were 5,732 reporters who filed 284,984 reports of pesticide use into PURS. The reports identified 551 active ingredients used statewide last year. The most used active ingredient, by pounds, was the soil fumigant metam-sodium (42 percent of total pounds reported), which is often used before planting potatoes to kill most soil life. The next two most commonly used active ingredients were the herbicide glyphosate (9 percent), and copper naphthenate (7 […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 29, 2008) On July 28, 2008, a coalition of farmworker, public health, and environmental groups -including Beyond Pesticides- filed a lawsuit challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision to allow continued use of the toxic pesticide diazinon. “The lack of action on diazinon is yet another example of EPA’s failure to fully consider the risks to farmworkers, children, and the environment from pesticides,” said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides. The lawsuit is part of the coalition’s multi-year campaign to protect children, farmworkers, and wildlife from the most dangerous pesticides and to reform EPA’s lackadaisical regulation of public and environmental health. The coalition has filed a series of lawsuits targeted at the worst poisons on the market: diazinon is near the top of that list. “EPA’s system for protecting the public from the dangers of pesticides like diazinon is broken,” said Joshua Osborne-Klein, an attorney for Earthjustice, the public interest law firm that represents the coalition. “The agency should be protecting farmworkers and children, not the profits of pesticide manufacturers.” Diazinon is an organophosphate pesticide that originates from nerve gases the Nazis developed during World War II. Farmworkers who are exposed to diazinon can suffer muscle […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 28, 2008) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced a proposed decision that residues of carbofuran, a toxic pesticide that is used on a variety of crops, will no longer be allowed on food. This effectively means that carbofuran will have to be removed from the U.S. market, benefiting consumers and farmworkers, as well as birds, which are frequently poisoned by the deadly chemical. EPA has concluded that dietary, worker, and ecological risks are of concern for all uses of carbofuran. According to EPA’s website, all products containing carbofuran generally cause unreasonable adverse effects on humans and the environment and do not meet safety standards, and therefore are ineligible for reregistration. The agency says the notice, which is available now online, will be published in the Federal Register for a 60-day public comment period on July 30, 2008. “This is a huge victory for the environment. EPA is to be congratulated for taking such decisive action to eliminate the dangers posed by carbofuran,” said Dr. Michael Fry, American Bird Conservancy’s Director of Conservation Advocacy. “This decision is based on overwhelming scientific evidence and sends a clear signal to manufacturers that it doesn’t pay to fight the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 25, 2008) San Francisco, California —  On July 24, 2008,  a broad coalition of farmworker, public health, and environmental groups filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to stop the continued use of a hazardous pesticide called endosulfan. The coalition is demanding action from EPA to protect children, farmworkers, and endangered species. Endosulfan is an organochlorine, part of the same family of chemicals as DDT, which EPA banned in 1972. Like other organochlorine pesticides, endosulfan is persistent in the environment and poisons humans and wildlife both in agricultural areas and in regions far from where it was applied. “This dangerous and antiquated pesticide should have been off the market years ago,” said Karl Tupper, a staff scientist with Pesticide Action Network. “The fact that EPA is still allowing the use of a chemical this harmful shows just how broken our regulatory system is.” Acute poisoning from endosulfan can cause headaches, nausea, vomiting, convulsions, and in extreme cases, unconsciousness and even death. Studies have linked endosulfan to smaller testicles, lower sperm production, and an increase in the risk of miscarriages. One glaring omission in the EPA’s decision is its failure to consider risks to children. A […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 24, 2008) Although the text of the Department of Labor’s proposal on workplace safety standards has not been made public, the Washington Post reports that the proposal will likely weaken an already inadequate risk assessment process, thus putting workers at an even greater risk of health effects from toxic chemical exposure. This proposal follows on the heels of news that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has recently lowered its value of a human life, which will make it easier to avoid environmental regulations. Peg Seminario, director of health and safety policy at the AFL-CIO, accused the Department of Labor of secrecy and said, “They are trying to essentially change the job safety and health laws and reduce required workplace protections through a midnight regulation.” According to the Post, changing the risk assessment process for workplace safety has become the priority for the Department of Labor. Undoubtedly, this prioritization came under pressure from industries, which claim that the risk assessment process overestimates worker risk. However, risk assessments, like those that the EPA employs in regulating pesticides, already allow for a 10-fold increase in risk of health effects for workers than they do for the general public. Risk assessments […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 21, 2008) Advocacy groups are encouraging California’s Senators to support Assemblywoman Fiona Ma’s bill (AB 977) that returns the ability to restrict pesticides to local jurisdictions. Currently, California and 40 other states have pesticide “preemption” laws that deny local authorities the right to pass pesticide restrictions that are more stringent than the state’s laws. Preemption laws are a result of intensive lobbying by the agrichemical industry, and groups in California and across the country believe the time has come to take back the democratic right for localities to adopt restrictions to protect environmental and public health. This authority enables local jurisdictions to respond to exposure scenarios that are not addressed by state law and address unique contamination or poisoning situations. California’s preemption law, passed in 1984, was the first of its kind in the nation and explicitly states that no local government “may prohibit or in any way attempt to regulate any matter relating to the registration, sale, transportation, or use of pesticides.” The state law nullified the first attempt at local pesticide regulation, which was a 1979 Mendocino County prohibition on aerial herbicide spraying that arose from an incident in which herbicide drifted almost three miles […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 14, 2008) According to calculations by the Associated Press (AP), the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) “value of a statistical life” is $6.9 million in today’s dollars, a drop of nearly $1 million from just five years ago. The AP discovered the change after a review of cost-benefit analyses over more than a dozen years.According to the federal government, the statistical value of a human life is calculated in the following manner. Suppose a new pesticide regulation reduces the annual risk of dying from cancer by 0.00001. In a population of 100 million, the regulation is expected, in a statistical sense, to result in 1000 fewer deaths from that cancer risk each year. If each person in that population of 1 million is willing to pay 7 cents a year for the reduction in mortality risks, $7 million is said to be the value of a statistical life (VSL). While the $1 million devaluation of a statistical human life may seem like just another bureaucratic recalculation, it has serious consequences. The AP proposes the following example: a hypothetical regulation that costs $18 billion to enforce but will prevent 2,500 deaths. At $7.8 million per person (the old figure), […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 11, 2008) According to an internal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) memorandum, a Supreme Court decision is undermining the agency’s ability to enforce the Clean Water Act (CWA). Two House Committee Chairmen have sent a letter to EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson for more information regarding EPA’s enforcement efforts in the wake of the 2006 decision Rapanos et ux., et al. v. United States. The Rapanos decision was split 4-1-4 over the question of Federal protections for waters of the United States, including wetlands, under the Clean Water Act. In the letter, Chairman James L. Oberstar of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and Chairman Henry A. Waxman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, explain that information has come to them indicating that enforcement of key clean water programs is faltering. The memo, obtained by Greenpeace and released by the Congressmen, was sent by EPA Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Granta Y. Nakayama and cites enforcement problems created by the Rapanos case and the subsequent guidance. In the memorandum, Mr. Nakayama states, “Data collected from the regions shows that a significant portion of the CWA docket has been adversely affected.” The letter from Congressmen Waxman […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 8, 2008) In comments filed July 7, 2008 with the Environmental Protection Agency on its new risk assessment and evaluation of the widely used anti-bacterial chemical triclosan, found in a wide range of products including soaps, toothpastes and personal care products, plastics, paints and clothing, public interest health and environmental groups point to health effects, environmental contamination and wildlife impacts and call for consumer uses to be halted. The comments, submitted by Beyond Pesticides, Food and Water Watch, Greenpeace US, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club and dozens of public health and environmental groups from the U.S. and Canada, urge the agency to use its authority to cancel the non-medical uses of the antibacterial chemical triclosan, widely found in consumer products and shown to threaten health and the environment. Triclosan and its degradation products bioaccumulate in humans, are widely found in the nations waterways, fish and other aquatic organisms, and because of triclosan’s proliferating uses, are linked to bacterial resistance, rendering triclosan and antibiotics ineffective for critical medical uses. The chemical and its degradates are also linked to endocrine disruption, cancer and dermal sensitization. “The nonmedical uses of triclosan are frivolous and dangerous, creating serious direct health […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 30, 2008) The European Union’s (EU) agricultural ministers have agreed to revise pesticide restrictions across the 27-member state. The draft proposals ban pesticides that are known to cause cancer, endocrine disruption, or reproductive harm in humans, affecting up to 15 percent of currently used products. However, in “exceptional cases, when available products do not offer sufficiently effective plant protection, other hazardous substances may be used, but only under strictly regulated conditions.” The agreement’s next step is parliamentary approval, where lawmakers could make the final rule even stricter.The proposal would push farmers and chemical companies to replace the most toxic products with alternatives, remove provisional licenses for pesticides not yet registered with the EU, restrict the use of crop-dusters, and ban pesticides near sensitive areas.“One of the main aims of the proposal is to maintain a high level of protection for humans, animals and the environment. This is essential for our citizens,” said EU Health Commissioner Androulla Vassiliou, who advocated for this ban in May. “We will not authorize what is known to be harmful for public health.” Hungary, the Irish Republic, Romania, and the UK abstained from voting, citing risk of crop yields and lack of research […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 19, 2008) Rockland County, NY legislators passed a bill on June 17, 2008 to eliminate the use of toxic pesticides on all county-owned or leased land. Rose Marie Raccioppi, the community organizer behind the bill, is a member of Beyond Pesticides, the National Pesticide-Free Lawn Coalition, and Orangetown’s Environmental Committee. She brought her concerns about pesticide exposure to the Rockland County Legislature last year, and advocated strongly for the passage of the Rockland County Non-Toxic Landscape Maintenance Act. “This is the beginning of what is hoped to be a continuing campaign,” Ms. Raccioppi said. “We hope it moves from county to towns to school districts and eventually, the consciousness of the individual homeowner.” As the law currently stands in New York, and most other states, municipalities may not pass legislation regulating the use of pesticides on private land and buildings, reserving governance of such matters to the state government. However, towns and counties throughout the U.S. (See Daily News of April 15, May 12, May 13, and June 16, 2008) are passing regulations restricting the use of pesticides on publicly-owned land. For a list of these local policies, please visit Beyond Pesticides’ Tools for Change site. The […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 16, 2008) Due to concerns of children being exposed to pesticides on the town’s fields, Rockport, Maine has adopted a new pest management policy that prohibits the use of toxic pesticides on town-owned property, according to the Knox County Times Reporter. The Rockport select board passed the policy unanimously. The policy mirrors that of Camden with a few slight changes concerning the pest management advisory committee. Alex Arau, the board member who introduced the policy, became concerned after realizing that pesticides were sprayed on the towns’ fields where children played in the grass and dirt. Steve McAllister, Rockport commission member, told the Knox County Times Reporter, “Sixteen years ago, the conservation commission asked the selectmen not to use [chemicals]. We were assured that it was OK and told it was more important to rid the town of dandelions than worry about chemicals.” “Times have changed and it is time for us to look at how we manage our fields differently,” Mr. Arau told the paper. The growth of the pesticide-free zone movement around the country and the passage of pesticide-free public land policies are very promising. Most recently, the General Services Administration has begun implementing an organic […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 11, 2008) The House of Representatives has passed legislation that will provide nearly $7 billion in grants to help K-12 schools go green. Entitled, “21st Century Green High-Performing Public School Facilities Act” (H.R. 3021), the bill, sponsored by Rep. Ben Chandler (D-KY), will help schools to become more energy efficient and healthier. There is a special emphasis on low-income schools where children are most at risk from unhealthy facilities and on schools that still suffer from the aftermath of hurricane Katrina. The legislation passed by the House on June 4, will allow the Secretary of Education to distribute funds to K-12 school districts according to a need-based formula, to make them more energy efficient, healthy, and high performing. Funding can also be used for asbestos removal services, energy efficiency improvements, lead abatements, and technology upgrades. The bill will also help school districts, which are struggling to make essential improvements, to create better school facilities and save significant amounts of energy and help to reduce greenhouse gases. Thirty-nine percent of greenhouse gas emissions come from buildings, and each green and energy efficient school will lead to annual emission reductions of 585,000 pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) — the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 4, 2008) On May 29, 2008, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its final risk mitigation decision for ten rodenticides, which outlines new measures it says will help protect children and the public from accidental poisonings as well as to decrease exposures to pets and wildlife from rodent-control products. However, because the decision omits key uses, allows continued applicator use of dangerous formulations, and recognizes a lack of product efficacy without a fully integrated program (yet does not require it on the label), environmentalists feel the final risk mitigation decision falls short of adequately protecting the health of people, wildlife and the environment.EPA is requiring that ten rodenticides used in bait products marketed to consumers be enclosed in bait stations, making the pesticide inaccessible to children and pets, and is also prohibiting the sale of loose bait, such as pellets, for use in homes. These ten rodenticides are: ”¢ Brodifacoum ”¢ Bromadiolone ”¢ Bromethalin ”¢ Chlorophacinone ”¢ Cholecalciferol ”¢ Difenacoum ”¢ Difethialone ”¢ Diphacinone ”¢ Warfarin ”¢ Zinc phosphide Exposure to children is also a major concern for these chemicals. According to the 2006 Annual Report of the American Association Poison Control Centers’ National Poison Data […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 29, 2008) A study published in the May issue of Environmental Health Perspectives shows a link between prenatal exposure to the pesticide DDT and poor attention-related skills in early infancy. This study follows in a long line of recent studies associated with the negative health effects of DDT including: diabetes; non-Hodgkin lymphoma; breast cancer; and autism. Despite the fact that DDT was banned in the U.S. in 1972, concentrations of this toxic chemical’s major metabolite, DDE, have remained alarmingly high in many ecosystems, including the waters of Los Angeles County, the arctic, and even U.S. national parks. All studies documenting the health effects of DDT and chemicals in the same family, organochlorines, are particularly important not just for understanding the lingering effects of DDT from days past, but because many countries continue to employ DDT as a method in controlling mosquitoes that transmit malaria, despite its toxicity, weakening efficacy, and availability of safer alternatives. Other organochlorines are still registered for use in the U.S.The study looked at 788 mother-infant pairs who met several criteria, which included living in a town adjacent to a Superfund site in New Bedford, Massachusetts, a location with known organochlorine contamination. Cord blood […]

(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, May 22, 2008) Before the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) yesterday released its scaled-back annual report on 2007 pesticide use in U.S. agriculture, a coalition of 44 environmental, sustainable farming, and health advocacy organizations, including Beyond Pesticides, called on USDA to reverse its plan to eliminate its pesticide reporting program in 2008. Elimination of USDA’s objective data will open the door wide to serious misinformation on pesticide use, charge the groups. USDA claims it lacks funding to continue the program. “Americans are rightly concerned about the adverse impacts of pesticides on human health and the environment,” said Charles Benbrook, PhD, chief scientist at The Organic Center. “Without USDA’s data, our organizations will be severely hampered in our ability to carry out research on the impacts of pesticides and offer informed input on decision-making regarding pesticide use and pest management systems in American agriculture.” Dr. Benbrook, former executive director of the Board on Agriculture of the National Academy of Sciences, has used USDA’s pesticide data extensively in his work for many years. “We strongly oppose this move by USDA to cut the legs off its publicly available database. Denying the public and regulatory agencies this critical information is bad […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 21, 2008) Top European Union (EU) official, Health Commissioner Androulla Vassiliou, called on European governments to adopt tougher guidelines on pesticides and to ban the use of all potentially dangerous pesticides that can cause cancer, reproductive effects and hormone disruption.The Health Commissioner urged agriculture ministers of member states not to ”˜water down’ recommendations in the two-year-old draft plan to introduce tougher guidelines on the use of pesticides. The plan, which needs approval by EU governments and the European Parliament, aims to tighten rules for authorizing new pesticides that come on to the EU market. It would also include mandatory recordkeeping by farmers, restrict the use of crop-dusters, force pesticide makers to reduce animal testing of their products, and stop the use of pesticides in sensitive areas near nature reserves and parks. “The key aim of the proposal is to protect the health of citizens and the environment, we must not lose sight of this,” Mr. Vassiliou told the ministers. Commissioner Vassiliou also stressed that pesticides that are toxic to reproductive systems, that disrupt hormones and those that cause cancer, should no longer be used to spray crops because of the risks to human and environmental health. Statistics […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 20, 2008) On May 19, 2008, scientists, Arctic tribal governments and Indigenous groups and environmental health advocates sent letters calling on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to phase out the organochlorine pesticide endosulfan.“It is time to take this dangerous and antiquated pesticide off the market,” says Jennifer Sass, Ph.D., a senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council. “The scientific evidence clearly shows that the continued use of this chemical puts the health of exposed farmworkers, communities and the environment at risk.” Dr. Sass is one of over 55 international scientists, medical doctors, nurses, and other health professionals urging EPA to take action on endosulfan in a letter to Administrator Stephen Johnson. Prominent scientists endorsing the letter include Philip Landrigan, M.D., M.Sc., a pediatrician and Director of the Center for Children’s Health and the Environment at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine and Ronald Herberman, M.D. and Devra Davis, Ph.D., M.P.H., researchers at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute. Used in the U.S. on tomatoes, cotton and other crops, endosulfan harms the hormone system, and low levels of exposure in the womb have been linked to male reproductive harm, other birth defects and possibly autism. Acute poisoning […]