[X] CLOSEMAIN MENU

  • Archives

  • Categories

    • air pollution (8)
    • Announcements (605)
    • Antibiotic Resistance (41)
    • Antimicrobial (18)
    • Aquaculture (30)
    • Aquatic Organisms (37)
    • Bats (7)
    • Beneficials (52)
    • Biofuels (6)
    • Biological Control (34)
    • Biomonitoring (40)
    • Birds (26)
    • btomsfiolone (1)
    • Bug Bombs (2)
    • Cannabis (30)
    • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (10)
    • Chemical Mixtures (8)
    • Children (113)
    • Children/Schools (240)
    • cicadas (1)
    • Climate (31)
    • Climate Change (86)
    • Clover (1)
    • compost (6)
    • Congress (21)
    • contamination (157)
    • deethylatrazine (1)
    • diamides (1)
    • Disinfectants & Sanitizers (19)
    • Drift (17)
    • Drinking Water (16)
    • Ecosystem Services (16)
    • Emergency Exemption (3)
    • Environmental Justice (167)
    • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (538)
    • Events (89)
    • Farm Bill (24)
    • Farmworkers (198)
    • Forestry (5)
    • Fracking (4)
    • Fungal Resistance (6)
    • Fungicides (26)
    • Goats (2)
    • Golf (15)
    • Greenhouse (1)
    • Groundwater (16)
    • Health care (32)
    • Herbicides (43)
    • Holidays (39)
    • Household Use (9)
    • Indigenous People (6)
    • Indoor Air Quality (6)
    • Infectious Disease (4)
    • Integrated and Organic Pest Management (71)
    • Invasive Species (35)
    • Label Claims (50)
    • Lawns/Landscapes (251)
    • Litigation (345)
    • Livestock (9)
    • men’s health (4)
    • metabolic syndrome (3)
    • Metabolites (4)
    • Microbiata (23)
    • Microbiome (28)
    • molluscicide (1)
    • Nanosilver (2)
    • Nanotechnology (54)
    • National Politics (388)
    • Native Americans (3)
    • Occupational Health (16)
    • Oceans (11)
    • Office of Inspector General (4)
    • perennial crops (1)
    • Pesticide Drift (163)
    • Pesticide Efficacy (11)
    • Pesticide Mixtures (14)
    • Pesticide Regulation (784)
    • Pesticide Residues (185)
    • Pets (36)
    • Plant Incorporated Protectants (2)
    • Plastic (9)
    • Poisoning (20)
    • Preemption (45)
    • President-elect Transition (2)
    • Reflection (1)
    • Repellent (4)
    • Resistance (120)
    • Rights-of-Way (1)
    • Rodenticide (33)
    • Seasonal (3)
    • Seeds (6)
    • soil health (18)
    • Superfund (5)
    • synergistic effects (24)
    • Synthetic Pyrethroids (16)
    • Synthetic Turf (3)
    • Take Action (596)
    • Textile/Apparel/Fashion Industry (1)
    • Toxic Waste (12)
    • U.S. Supreme Court (2)
    • Volatile Organic Compounds (1)
    • Women’s Health (26)
    • Wood Preservatives (36)
    • World Health Organization (11)
    • Year in Review (2)
  • Most Viewed Posts

Daily News Blog

24
Nov

Healthy and Happy Thanksgiving

(Beyond Pesticides, November 24, 2011) On Thanksgiving, thank you for being a part of Beyond Pesticides and sharing and contributing to the vision necessary to protect the web and fragility of life. We believe that there is no time like Thanksgiving to think about how we can more effectively join together as families and communities across divisions and different points of view to find a common purpose in protecting the health of the environment and all that inhabit it.

Best wishes for a Healthy and Happy Thanksgiving

 

Share

23
Nov

Canada To Examine the Impact of Monsanto’s Roundup on Amphibians

(Beyond Pesticides, November 23, 2011) A Federal Court of Canada has ordered Health Canada -the nation’s public health department- to take a second look at the impacts on amphibians of glyphosate-based pesticides, one of the most widely-used pesticides in Canada and the U.S., which includes products like Monsanto’s Roundup. The decision was the result of an action brought by a pesticide-activist and pediatrician, Josette Wier, M.D., and orders Health Canada to address requests by the public for a review of the safety of a pesticide where there is serious scientific concern about its risks.

Dr. Wier’s legal challenge focused on wetlands that provide critical habitat for many species of frogs and amphibians. The original request for a special review of glyphosate-pesticides, especially those containing the “inert†ingredient polyoxyethyleneamine (POEA), and a subsequent 2009 legal challenge was brought because of her concern about possible aerial spraying of Monsanto’s pesticide in the forests near her community in Smithers. In her suit, Dr. Weir stated that the evidence “challenges the scientific validity of the previous evaluations†that led to the registration of the glyphosate herbicides containing POEA. Judge Michael Kelen of the Federal Court of Canada in his decision wrote, “[Dr. Wier] is entitled to a proper analysis as to whether the pesticide in issue presents an environmental risk to amphibians inhabiting ephemeral wetlands [those that are sometimes dry] which are subject to the aerial spraying of the pesticide in silviculture.”

“Health Canada knew that there were risks with these pesticides, and yet failed to act to protect amphibian species, many of which are endangered,†said Dr. Wier. “The judge affirmed that Health Canada should take a precautionary approach —and re-examine their approval of pesticides where scientists don’t agree on the risks.â€

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, is a general herbicide used for eradication of broadleaf weeds. It has been linked to a number of serious human health effects, including increased cancer risk and neurotoxicity, as well as eye, skin, and respiratory irritation. The inert ingredient, POEA, has been shown to kill human embryonic cells. It is also of particular concern due to its toxicity to aquatic species as well as instances of serious human health effects from acute exposure. One study found that Roundup alone is “extremely lethal†to amphibians in concentrations found in the environment. Another found that Rana pipiens tadpoles chronically exposed to environmentally-relevant concentrations of glyphosate formulations, containing POEA, exhibits decreased snout-vent length at metamorphosis, increased time to metamorphosis, tail damage, and gonadal abnormalities. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in its registration documents for glyphosate determined that glyphosate, its salts and metabolites are likely to impact adversely the endangered California red-legged frog based on prey and habitat reduction.

A report released earlier this year finds that industry regulators have known for a long time that glyphosate causes birth defects. The report, “RoundUp and Birth Defects: Is the public being kept in the dark?†published by Earth Open Source, says that regulators misled the public about the safety of glyphosate for over 20 years! In 2009, Beyond Pesticides, submitted comments to the EPA showing new and emerging science, which illustrates that glyphosate and its formulated products pose unreasonable risks to human and environmental health, and as such should not be considered eligible for continued registration. Some of the most widespread uses of glyphosate that have been attracting public attention include its use in invasive weed management and home gardening. The increase of glyphosate use in these areas is directly tied to the larger problem of poor land management, including over grazing, over development, soil compaction, and other stressors.

Recently, a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) official speaking at an agricultural conference said that the heavy use of Roundup, an herbicide manufactured by Monsanto and used heavily on Roundup Ready genetically engineered (GE) crops, appears to be causing harmful changes in soil and potentially hindering yields of crops that farmers are cultivating. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has detected glyphosate in significant levels in rain and rivers in agricultural areas across the Mississippi River watershed, according to one of their recent reports. The greatest glyphosate use, according to USGS, is in the Mississippi River basin where most applications are for weed control on GE corn, soybeans, and cotton. Overall, agricultural use of glyphosate has increased from less than 11,000 tons in 1992 to more than 88,000 tons in 2007.

Monsanto created “Roundup Ready†crops to withstand its Roundup herbicide and so, growing Roundup Ready crops such as soy, cotton, and corn has led to greater use of herbicides. It has also led to the spread of herbicide resistant weeds on millions of acres throughout the U.S. and other countries where such crops are grown, as well as contamination of conventional and organic crops, which has been costly to U.S. farmers. Because of GE crops, Roundup has become the most popular pesticide ever. USGS has submitted the studies to EPA to be included in data that is being considered as EPA reviews the registration of glyphosate. The agency expects the review to be complete by 2015, at which point it will issue a decision to either continue to allow unrestricted use of glyphosate or institute limitations or a ban on the chemical in light of emerging science.

Beyond Pesticides is currently involved in multiple lawsuits involving Roundup Ready and other GE crops. One lawsuit was filed against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and seeks to end cultivation of GE crops on 25 national wildlife refuges across the U.S. Southeast. The suit charges that FWS unlawfully entered into cooperative farming agreements and approved planting of GE crops in eight states without the environmental review required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and in violation of FWS policy. This is the third in a series of lawsuits challenging FWS’s practice of permitting GE crops on wildlife refuges. In 2009 and 2010, groups successfully challenged approval of GE plantings on two wildlife refuges in Delaware —Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge and Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge, which forced FWS to end GE planting in the entire 12-state Northeastern region.

As researchers scramble to find new ways of chemically coping with weed control and increased weed resistance brought about by Roundup and other chemicals, they overlook the glaring fact that there already exist alternative systems such as organic farming, which erases the need for these drastic measures through its systemic pest prevention approaches. Organic farming can be at least as productive as conventional chemically-reliant farming, while having none of the toxic side effects that create significant risks to ecosystems and human health. To learn more, see Beyond Pesticides’ page on organic food and agriculture.

Source: Pacific Free Press

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share

22
Nov

Groups Ask EPA to Strengthen Overdue Pesticide Protections for Farmworkers

(Beyond Pesticides, November 22, 2011) Several farmworker groups filed a petition last week with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), urging the agency to implement stronger protections for farmworkers, with particular regard to health effects of exposure to toxic pesticides on the job. The petition seeks to eliminate the existing dual standard providing fewer workplace protections against pesticide exposures for farmworkers than for workers using hazardous chemicals in non-agricultural sectors.

“Most American workers enjoy workplace protections created by the federal Office of Safety and Health Administration, but not farmworkers,†said Eve Gartner, lead attorney for Earthjustice, the public interest law firm representing the groups. “They get second class treatment which exposes them to high levels of very dangerous pesticides which is not only unhealthy but also fundamentally unfair.â€

According to Earth Justice, the health and safety of industrial workers falls under the jurisdiction of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Farmworkers must rely on EPA’s Worker Protection Standard of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) which is far more lenient than the OSHA rules that protect industrial workers encountering potentially dangerous chemicals.

“All we are asking is that the EPA protect farmworkers with standards that are as protective as industrial workers enjoy under OSHA,†said Virginia Ruiz, attorney for co-counsel Farmworker Justice. “Revisions to WPS are long overdue. EPA has not substantively updated it since 1992.â€

Farm work is demanding and dangerous physical labor. A 2008 study by a National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) researcher finds that the incidence rate of pesticide poisoning is extremely high among U.S. agricultural workers. An average of 57.6 out of every 100,000 agricultural workers experience acute pesticide poisoning, illness or injury each year, the same order of magnitude as the annual incidence rate of breast cancer in the United States. As a result of cumulative long-term exposures, they and their children are at risk of developing serious chronic health problems such as cancer, neurological impairments and Parkinson’s disease. Despite the overwhelming evidence, EPA has not effectively updated worker protections for almost 20 years.

EPA has said that it expects to publish proposed revisions to the WPS early next year. The groups’ recommendations for those revisions focus on three key protections for the workers who handle and apply pesticides:
â€Â¢ Medical monitoring of workers using pesticides that inhibit enzymes necessary to the functioning of the nervous system;
â€Â¢ Use of “closed systems” for mixing and loading pesticides, which prevent splashing and blowing of pesticides onto workers;
â€Â¢ Use of enclosed cabs in tractors from which pesticides are being sprayed using an airblaster.

In addition, the petition requests a range of basic measures that would afford stronger protections for agricultural fieldworkers.

The groups argue that EPA is required to incorporate these protections into its revisions both under FIFRA, the federal statute regulating pesticides, and under the agency’s stated obligation to achieve environmental justice by addressing the disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs and policies on minority populations and low-income populations.

The petition, which was prepared by Earthjustice and Farmworker Justice, is submitted on behalf of United Farm Workers, Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA), Farm Worker Pesticide Project (FWPP), California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation (CRLAF), Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste (PCUN), Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC) and The Farmworker Association of Florida, Inc.

“We must speak up for the very people who help to put food on our tables,†said Ms. Gartner. “Their work is integral to our daily lives and further delay in providing these basic protections is just unacceptable.â€

Our food choices have a direct effect on those who grow and harvest what we eat around the world. This is why it’s important to eat organic. USDA organic certification is the only system of food labeling that is subject to independent public review and oversight, assuring consumers that toxic, synthetic pesticides used in conventional agriculture are replaced by management practices focused on soil biology, biodiversity, and plant health. This eliminates commonly used toxic chemicals in the production and processing of conventional food, which harms farmworkers and farm families.

For more information on the importance of eating organic food for you, workers and the environment, check out Beyond Pesticides’ Eating with a Conscience food guide and organic food program page.

Source: Earth Justice Press Release

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share

21
Nov

Recent Reports Help Consumers Reduce Pesticide Exposure and Improve Nutrition

(Beyond Pesticides, November 21, 2011) Two recent reports from the Organic Center can help consumers identify food choices that will reduce their intake of pesticides while enhancing the overall nutritional content of their diets. The reports, entitled Dietary Risk Index and Transforming Jane Doe’s Diet are based upon state-of-the-art pesticide residue and risk assessment research conducted by USDA and EPA. The reports establish that switching to organically produced and handled foods significantly reduces the amount of pesticides consumers will receive from their diet and that a few simple changes in behavior can drive such exposure to nearly zero.

Noting that extensive research has identified fresh fruits and vegetables as by far the greatest source of pesticide exposure and risk in our diets, the Dietary Risk Index (DRI) report focuses on the relative risk of choices within these food groups. The DRI calculates expected risk by weighing the toxicity of a specific pesticide with the amount of the substance to which consumers are likely to be exposed. This estimated risk is then measured against the EPA-established “level of concernâ€, the exposure level beyond which EPA can no longer assert a “reasonable certainty of no harm.†The DRI calculations for individual pesticides can then be combined to estimate the total dietary risks of a food by taking into account all of the residues found in that food. The Organic Center’s methodology is also capable of calculating the relative risk of eating organic fruit and vegetables exclusively compared to conventional produce, or consuming exclusively domestically raised produce compared to imported alternatives.

The DRI report determines that, in general, most pesticide dietary risk is caused by proverbial “hot potatoesâ€, or foods that sometimes contain relatively high residues of relatively toxic compounds. For example, the report cites residues of two pesticides — chlorpyrifos and dicofol — as driving the overall risk associated with domestically produced apples in 2009, despite a total of 51 different pesticides residues having been detected on the 724 samples collected that year. Significantly, the DRI report supports the Organic Center’s earlier conclusion that replacing conventional fresh and processed fruit and vegetable products with organic brands would reduce overall pesticide dietary risk by 97%.

The Transforming Jane Doe’s Diet (TJDD) report goes a step beyond calculating pesticide toxicity in the diet to include the intake of 27 essential nutrients. Working with a daily diet based on USDA My Plate recommendations, TJDD substituted organic and nutrient-dense options for conventionally produced and processed foods. For example, enriched white bread was replaced by whole wheat organic bread and fresh organic strawberries took the place of strawberry jam. By making these and other relatively simple changes, the report reported an increase of 79% increase in the measured nutrients and a reduction in pesticide toxicity using the DRI methodology of more than two-thirds.

“This is the first-ever analysis to offer recommendations on how to reduce pesticide risk level and increase the nutritional quality of an average person’s daily diet,” said Joan Boykin, Executive Director of the Organic Center. “We are particularly proud of this report and can only hope that it will further incentivize consumers to make the simple dietary changes that can improve their health, as well as the environment in which we live.â€

Reducing dietary exposure to pesticide residues is just one of several powerful incentives for consumers to purchase organically produced and handled foods. Pesticides can have enormously detrimental effects on farmworkers who are exposed during application as well as non-target organisms impacted by contact with the toxic compounds. In fact, there are many hazardous pesticides that are not associated with food residues but do get into waterways and groundwater, contaminate nearby communities, poison farmworkers, and kill wildlife, while not all showing up at detectable levels on our food. For a comprehensive understanding of how your choice of organic fruits and vegetables impacts the environment as well as human health, please visit Beyond Pesticides Eating with A Conscience webpage.

Both of the Organic Center’s reports calculate dietary pesticide exposure using data from the Pesticide Data Program (PDP), which is USDA’s most comprehensive residue research initiative. First begun in 1991, the PDP was expanded significantly after passage of the Food Quality Protection Act in 1996 to gather the dietary exposure data necessary for an improved approach to calculating human health risks. Responding to press reports that the produce industry was seeking to suppress release of the 2010 PDP data, a group of leading pediatric health professionals wrote to USDA, EPA, and FDA urging that the results be promptly released. In their May 2011 letter, the pediatric health experts cited the elevated risk associated with pesticide residues on foods commonly consumed by infants and children including processed apples, berries and peaches and challenged the government to, among other measures, enhance efforts to promote organic fruits and vegetables as options for consumers. USDA currently estimates that the 2010 PDP data will not be released before January 2012.

Source: The Organic Center

Share

18
Nov

Research Again Proves Equal Yields, Higher Profits from Organic Farming

(Beyond Pesticides, November 18, 2011) Organic crop systems can provide similar yields and much higher economic returns than a conventional corn-soybean rotation, according to thirteen years of data from a side-by-side comparison at Iowa State University’s Neely-Kinyon Research and Demonstration Farm. The University’s Long-Term Agroecological Research Experiment (LTAR) began in 1998 with support from the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture. LTAR is one of the longest running replicated comparisons in the country. Kathleen Delate, PhD., professor in ISU Agronomy and Horticulture, leads the project.

“The transitioning years are the hardest years,†Dr. Delate said, explaining that the project was originally designed to help farmers make the shift into an organic system. To sell a product as organic, the crop must be raised for three years prior to harvest in accordance with organic systems plans on land that has not been treated with synthetic fertilizers and has only been exposed to substances placed on the “NationL List, ” which is established by the Organic Foods Production Act.

The LTAR experiment shows that organic crops can remain competitive with conventional crops even during the three-year transition. Averaged over 13 years, yields of organic corn, soybean, and oats have been equivalent to or slightly greater than their conventional counterparts. Likewise, a 12-year average for alfalfa and an 8-year average for winter wheat also show no significant difference between organic yields and the Adair County average.

Organic crops fetch a premium price on the market and eliminate the need for expensive inputs like herbicides and synthetic fertilizers. As a result, they are far more profitable than conventional crops. Craig Chase, PhD., interim leader of the Leopold Center’s Marketing and Food Systems Initiative and extension farm management specialist, calculates the returns to managementâ€â€that is, the money left over for family living after deducting labor, land, and production costsâ€â€for both systems. He bases his calculations on actual LTAR data from 1998 to 2004, as well as scenarios modeled with enterprise budgets.

Both methods gave the same result: On average, organic systems return roughly $200 per acre more than conventional crops.

In addition to its profitability, organic agriculture helps build healthy soils. While conventional LTAR plots receive synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, organic plots receive only local, manure-based amendments. Total nitrogen increased by 33 percent in the organic plots, and researchers measured higher concentrations of carbon, potassium, phosphorous, magnesium, and calcium. The results suggest that organic farming can foster greater efficiency in nutrient use and higher potential for sequestrating carbon.

Dr. Delate said they use “a whole suite of practices to manage weeds†in the organic plots, including timely tillage and longer crop rotations. Allelopathic chemicals from rye and alfalfa help keep weed populations under control, as does growing an alfalfa cover crop in winter, which provided cover for beneficial insects and animals.

“I think there’s a strong future for organic agriculture,†Dr. Delate said. “My phone is ringing off the hook. The interest hasn’t waned.â€

LTAR’s findings concur with recently published results from the Rodale Institute’s 30-year Farming Systems Trial in Pennsylvania. The Rodale Institute also concludes that organic systems can provide similar yields and greater profits. In addition, Rodale calculates that organic crops require 45 percent less energy, and contributes significantly less to greenhouse gas emissions. Organic corn proves especially profitable during drought years, when its yields jump up to 31 percent higher than conventional.

Download a brochure about the LTAR project here.

For more information on organic food and farming, visit our Organic program page.

Take Action: Organic agriculture has been proven time again to be equally viable for both farmers and consumers while having none of the ill effects of conventional industrial agriculture. However, organic systems receive very little federal support, especially compared to the billions of dollars in subsidies that are paid to conventional producers every year. A bill currently being considered in Congress seeks to work toward correcting this imbalance.

Tell your Congressional representatives to support the Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act (LFFJA), S. 1773 and H.R. 3286, which is a comprehensive bill intended for inclusion in the 2012 Farm Bill. The legislation helps farmers and ranchers by addressing production, aggregation, processing, marketing, and distribution needs to access growing local and regional food markets. The bill would provide critical support for a number of programs that benefit organic farmers and the organic industry, as well. It also assists consumers by improving access to healthy food. The measure provides secure farm bill funding for critically important programs that support organic and family farms, expand new farming opportunities, create rural jobs, and invest in the local food and agriculture economy.

Source: Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share

17
Nov

Take Action – Senate Threatens Clean Water with Pesticide Amendment

(Beyond Pesticides, November 17, 2011) Updated 1:00 p.m. – Thanks to everyone for taking action and putting pressure on your Senators. Senator Roberts filed an amendment yesterday to the Energy and Water Appropriations Bill opposing provisions to gut pesticide protections from the Clean Water Act. It is the same language we opposed this summer. He has tried to slip it into other bills as well. It’s important that we continue to put pressure on legislators to oppose the amendment offered by Senator Roberts and to support stronger pesticide restrictions around water.

PLEASE CALL YOUR SENATORS(Senate directory) with the following message:

“We urge you to oppose Senator Roberts’ amendment to the Energy and Water appropriations bill. Previously introduced as S. 718, the amendment would prevent the EPA from protecting our waterways from pesticide discharges. This bill will strip EPA’s ability to protect our waters from pollution by amending the Clean Water Act (CWA) and federal pesticide law to exempt applications of pesticides to waterways from CWA standards. There is already widespread contamination of our waterways by toxic pesticides, and we cannot rely solely on our weak pesticide law to protect those waters. This amendment is bad for public health and bad for our rivers, lakes and streams.

“EPA has already drafted its permit for these pesticides applications, which offers modest protections. This amendment is a last ditch effort to avoid any protections of our waterways from dangerous pesticides. We urge you to oppose this amendment and any Senate version of S.718 or related HR 872.”

Background on HR 872 / S 718

The so-called “Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011,” would ensure that CWA permits are not required for the application of pesticides. The bill states, “A permit shall not be required by the Administrator or a State under [the Clean Water Act] for a discharge from a point source into navigable waters of a pesticide authorized for sale, distribution, or use under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), or the residue of such a pesticide, resulting from the application of such pesticide.”

FIFRA and CWA are complementary laws. The two statutes have fundamentally different standards and methods in determining whether a pesticide will have unreasonable adverse effects on the environment and/or human health. The CWA statute is more stringent than FIFRA. CWA has a “zero discharge” standard, meaning any amount of discharge, no matter how small, without a permit, constitutes a violation of the CWA. Risk assessment, on the other hand, used under FIFRA, is weaker than a “zero harm” standard. Risk/benefit allows a certain amount of pollution (i.e. risk) in exchange for controversial calculations of benefit and use a threshold of harm that can vary upon EPA discretion. Since the CWA statute is more stringent in its oversight of U.S. waterways, FIFRA should not be allowed to override the CWA.

In March 2011, HR 872 passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 292-130. The bill, introduced by Rep. Bob Gibbs (R-OH), seeks to amended FIFRA and CWA to eliminate provisions requiring pesticide applicators to obtain a permit to allow pesticides or their residues to enter waterways. It would reverse a 2009 Sixth Circuit court decision which ruled that, under FIFRA and CWA, EPA must require such permits.

The January 2009 Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in National Cotton Council v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, requires pesticide applications to be permitted under the Clean Water Act. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit would be in addition to the less protective label requirements under FIFRA. EPA drafted proposed rules in 2010 outlining the applicability of the permits for pesticide usage. Since then, industry has lobbied hard to get Congress to prevent this measure from going into effect this year.

Senator Roberts and the other cosponsors of the bill claim that NPDES permits are burdensome on farmers, even though the permits are only required for a narrow range of uses, and does not affect terrestrial agricultural spraying. NPDES permits will monitor the discharge of pesticides into waterways by local and state authorities, including evaluation of the potential risks discharges might present to aquatic and semi-aquatic species and help safeguard against contaminated fish and drinking water.

Meanwhile, stating that “the provisions of this permit are designed to improve protection of public health and our nation’s water quality,†EPA has posted a pre-publication version of its draft final pesticide general permit. The pre-publication version of the draft final pesticide general permit has concluded interagency review by the Office of Management and Budget. Since EPA is currently engaged in consultation with federal resource agencies under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), this version of the draft final permit does not contain any additional or revised conditions that may result from ongoing ESA consultation.

According to the agency, this draft final permit is not considered a “final agency action.†Even though legislation passed the U.S. House of Representatives that would remove the need for the permit, EPA states that it is still providing a preview of the draft final permit to assist states in developing their own permits and for the regulated community to become familiar with the permit’s requirements before it becomes effective.

The draft has not significantly changed from the proposed permit in 2010. The draft version of the final permit covers operators who apply pesticides that result in discharges from the following use patterns: (1) mosquito and other flying insect pest control; (2) weed and algae control; (3) animal pest control; and (4) forest canopy pest control. The permit would not cover 1) non-target spray drift, or 2) discharges of pesticides to waterbodies that are impaired for that pesticide. Agricultural runoff and irrigation return flows are exempt from permitting under the Clean Water Act and, thus, do not require CWA permits. The permit also does not cover, nor is permit coverage required, for pesticide applications that do not result in a point source discharge to waters of the U.S. such as terrestrial applications for the purpose of controlling pests on agricultural crops, forest floors, or range lands.

Share

16
Nov

EPA Releases Pyrethroid Risk Assessment, Ignores Numerous Health Effects

(Beyond Pesticides, November 16, 2011) On November 9, 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its cumulative risk assessment for the pyrethroid class of insecticides, concluding that these pesticides “do not pose risk concerns for children or adults,†ignoring a wealth of independent data that links this class of chemicals to certain cancers, respiratory and reproductive problems, and the onset of insect resistance. The agency went as far to state that its cumulative assessment supports consideration of registering additional new uses of these pesticides, potentially opening the flood gates for manufacturers to bombard the market with more pyrethroid pesticides, endangering the health of the public.

EPA issued the final pyrethins/pyrethroid cumulative risk assessment in the Federal Register and is requesting comment until January 9, 2011, including information that may be used to further refine the assessment. Pyrethroids are a widely used class of insecticides used for mosquito control and various insects in residential and agricultural settings. However pyrethroids are highly neurotoxic and have been linked to cancer, endocrine disruption, suppression of the immune system, and various reproductive effects. This class of chemicals includes permethrin, bifenthrin, resmethrin, cyfluthrin and scores of others. Read Beyond Pesticides’ factsheet “Syntethic Pyrethroids.†Once the agency completes and approves the pyrethroid chemical assessment, it is likely that new uses of these pesticides will be added. The agency claims that more pyrethroid registrations may help combat recent pervasive pest problems, such as stink bugs and bed bugs, even though this class of chemicals is already known to be ineffective against these pests due to growing resistance issues compounded with continued pesticide use. However, serious issues such as the carcinogenic and endocrine disrupting potential of several pyrethroids were not mentioned in the risk assessment even though a recent study published in Environmental Health Perspectives finds that low-dose, short-term exposure to esfenvalerate, a synthetic pyrethroid pesticide, delays the onset of puberty in at doses two times lower than EPA’s stated no observable effect level.

Most troubling is the agency’s decision to reduce the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) protective safety factor from 10X (an additional margin of safety of 10 times) to 1X for children and adults over six years, and to 3X for children under six years of age. The FQPA safety factor is intended to protect vulnerable infants and children to account for their special susceptibility to pesticides taking into account the potential for pre- and post-natal toxicity. Given that children are especially sensitive to the effects of synthetic pyrethroids like permethrin, this reduction in the special safety factor is egregious. Studies have found that certain pyrethoids like permethrin are almost five times more toxic to the young compared to adults. Additionally, studies have shown that permethrin may inhibit neonatal brain development. In this new cumulative risk assessment, the agency even states, “Based on pharmacokinetic data, there is evidence that indicates an increase in sensitivity to pyrethroids of the young compared to adults,†which is attributed to the difference in the ability of the adults and juveniles to metabolize pyrethroids. EPA’s modeling data also predict a 3-fold increase of pyrethroid concentrations in juvenile brains compared to adults. Similarly, researchers at Emory University and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in a published study conclude that residential pesticide use represents the most important risk factor for children’s exposure to pyrethroid insecticides. Despite all this, EPA chooses to forgo this evidence and green light more uses of pyrethroid chemicals which will inevitably impact more vulnerable children.

With the phase-out of most residential uses of the common organophosphate insecticides, chlorpyrifos and diazinon, home use of pyrethroids has increased. Pesticide products containing synthetic pyrethroids are often described by pest control operators and community mosquito management bureaus as “safe as chrysanthemum flowers.†While pyrethroids are a synthetic version of an extract from the chyrsanthemum plant, they are chemically engineered to be more toxic, take longer to break down, and are often formulated with synergists, increasing potency, and compromising the human body’s ability to detoxify the pesticide.

As a consequence of their widespread use, many pests such as bed bugs are now becoming resistant to pyrethroids. A recent study shows that modern bed bugs have developed the ability to defend themselves against pyrethroid pesticides, with a required dosage of as much as 1,000 times the amount that should normally be lethal, due in part to the widespread use of such treatment methods. Due to the ability of these organisms to develop resistance to chemical agents, exposing these bugs to more pesticides would lead to higher rates of resistance among insect populations, a point that EPA does not acknowledge.

EPA is mandated to complete cumulative risk assessments for chemicals that have the same mechanism of toxicity. In 2009, EPA conceded that pyrethroid chemicals did in fact have a common mechanism of toxicity. In this risk assessment, not all pyrethroids were evaluated and various routes of exposures, such as dermal and inhalation exposures, were not adequately examined, with the agency stating that these exposures “generally do not significantly contribute to the overall risk picture,†even though numerous pyrethroid formulations of â€Ëœapply to skin’ mosquito repellent and indoor bug sprays are widely available. In an EPA National Exposure Research Laboratory study, several synthetic pyrethroids and their degradates were found in indoor dust collected from homes and childcare centers in North Carolina and Ohio, meaning that children inhale contaminated dust particles daily while these exposures go unevaluated. Given that asthma is the most common long-term childhood illness today, persistent residues of pyrethroids in house dust and air need to be taken very seriously.

Exposure to synthetic pyrethroids has been reported to lead to headaches, dizziness, nausea, irritation, and skin sensations. There are also serious chronic health concerns related to synthetic pyrethroids. EPA classifies permethrin and cypermethrin as possible human carcinogens, based on evidence of lung tumors in lab animals exposed to these chemicals. EPA also lists permethrin as a suspected endocrine disruptor. Synthetic pyrethroids have also been linked to respiratory problems such as hypersensitization, and may be triggers for asthma attacks. Material Safety Data Sheets, issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), for pyrethroid products often warn, “Persons with history of asthma, emphysema, and other respiratory tract disorders may experience symptoms at low exposures.†Although synthetic pyrethroids are often seen as safe alternatives to organophosphate insecticides, they are persistent and are making their way into human bodies at alarming rates. CDC â€Ëœs Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals reports that widely used pyrethroids are found in greater than 50% of the subjects tested.

In addition to human health effects which this cumulative risk assessment addresses, pyrethroids are also persistent in the environment and adversely impact non-target organisms. A 2008 survey found pyrethroid contamination in 100 percent of urban streams sampled in California. Researchers also find pyrethroid residues in California streams, although at relatively low concentrations (10-20 parts per trillion) in river and creek sediments that are toxic to bottom dwelling fish. Other studies find pyrethroids present in effluent from sewage treatment plants at concentrations just high enough to be toxic to sensitive aquatic organisms.

At the same time, there are clear established methods for managing homes and schools that prevent infestation of unwanted insects without the use of synthetic chemicals, including exclusion techniques, sanitation and maintenance practices, as well as mechanical and least toxic controls (which include boric acid and diatomaceous earth). Based on the host of health effects linked to this chemical class, an increase in synthetic pyrethroid use is hazardous and unnecessary.

Take Action: Tell EPA that more uses of pyrethroids is hazardous and unnecessary. Submit comments and input on the Pyrethrins/Pyrethroid Cumulative Risk Assessment by January 9, 2012, to docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0746 at Regulations.gov. The assessment and supporting documents are available in this docket.

Share

15
Nov

Study Links Pesticide Exposure to Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma

(Beyond Pesticides, November 15, 2011) Research published in the online edition of Environmental Health Perspectives finds that exposure to certain pesticides elevates the risk of non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma (NHL). The study, “A Prospective Study of Organochlorines in Adipose Tissue and Risk of non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma,†finds a positive correlation between levels of the organochlorine pesticides DDT, cis-nonachlor, chlordane, and their breakdown products in human fat tissue and the often deadly form of cancer.

The researchers from the Danish Cancer Society’s Institute of Cancer Epidemiology conducted a case-cohort study using a prospective Danish cohort of 57,053 persons enrolled between 1993 and 1997. Within the cohort they identified 256 persons diagnosed with NHL in the population-based nationwide Danish Cancer Registry and randomly selected 256 sub-cohort persons. The research team measured concentrations of eight pesticides and ten polychlorinated biphenyl congeners (PCBs) in fat tissue collected upon enrollment.

The results indicate a higher risk of NHL in association with higher fat tissue levels of DDT, cis-nonachlor and oxychlordane, but shows no association with PCBs. Because the tissue samples were taken up to 15 years prior to the cancer diagnosis, the research suggests that exposure to these organochlorines increases the risk of NHL later in life and strengthens the theory that there is an environmental factor in contracting the disease.

While most organochlorine pesticides are banned or restricted, they still continue to cause problems decades after their widespread use has ended. This study reinforces the need for a more precautionary approach to regulating pesticides and industrial chemicals. Once released into the environment, many chemicals can affect health for generations, either through persistence in the environment or long-term changes to the genetic code of humans and other animals.

Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma is cancer of the lymphoid tissue, which includes the lymph nodes, spleen, and other organs of the immune system. According to the American Cancer Society, a person has a 1 in 50 chance of developing non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Most of the time, this cancer affects adults. However, children can get some forms of lymphoma. High-risk groups include those who have received an organ transplant or who have a weakened immune system. This type of cancer is slightly more common in men than in women.

Organochlorine pesticides have previously been linked to a number of adverse effects on human health, including birth defects and diabetes. This study illustrates how the health impacts of pesticides can be often subtle and delayed, and pesticides once considered to pose “acceptable†risks are continuing to affect public health. In response to the growing evidence linking pesticide exposures to numerous human health effects, Beyond Pesticides launched the Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database to capture the range of diseases linked to pesticides through epidemiologic studies. The database, which currently contains hundreds of entries of epidemiologic and laboratory exposure studies, is continually updated to track the emerging findings and trends.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share

14
Nov

Pesticide Poisoning of Lobsters Leads to Indictment

(Beyond Pesticides, November 14, 2011) Environment Canada’s enforcement division has indicted the multinational firm Cooke Aquaculture and three of its senior officials on eleven criminal charges stemming from illegal pesticide applications that spread to sicken and kill wild lobsters. The indictment alleges that in 2009 Cooke applied cypermethrin, a pesticide prohibited for use in aquatic settings in Canada, to control sea lice infestations in open water salmon net pens. The alleged applications occurred in the Passamaquoddy Bay which separates the Canadian province of New Brunswick from Maine and feeds into the Bay of Fundy. After dead and weakened lobsters were discovered in Canadian waters in the fall of 2009 and early 2010, Environment Canada linked the incidents to cypermethrin exposure and raided eight Cooke facilities. A conviction on the first count could result in a fine of $1 million with subsequent counts punishable by a $1 million fine or three years in prison, or both.

Cypermethrin is a synthetic pyrethroid used for insect control in a number of agricultural and structural pest management settings. EPA has identified cypermethrin as a possible human carcinogen and classifies formulated pesticides containing it as slightly or moderately toxic. According to Susan Shaw, Ph.D., director of the Marine Environmental Research Institute in Blue Hill, Maine, cypermethrin and similar pesticides are extremely toxic to lobsters and other marine species, especially crustaceans. “It’s a very toxic substance and just does not belong in the marine environment,†Dr. Shaw said. “The oceans are under siege from so many problems. This is just unacceptable.†Despite these concerns, EPA allows aquatic applications of cypermethrin to control sea lice, parasitic crustaceans that attach themselves to the skin of juvenile salmon causing lesions resulting in disease and mortality for the fish. In 2010, Cooke used the brand-name pesticide Excis, which contains cypermethrin, at 59 of the 76 salmon production pens that it operates in Maine.

While aquaculture has the potential to lessen pressure on severely stressed wild fish populations, poorly designed and managed systems repeat the mistakes commonly seen in industrial-style livestock production. Crowding an excessive number of fish into an unnatural habitat creates a breeding ground for pests and diseases which producers treat with prophylactic doses of medications, including antibiotics. Sea lice, for example, were known to afflict wild runs of Atlantic salmon, but did not become an economically significant pest until the introduction of large-scale net pen production systems. Routine treatment with pesticides such as cypermethrin and antibiotics to minimize the symptoms of an unhealthy environment results in accelerated pest resistance and prompts producers to employ increasingly toxic compounds.

Residues from these medications along with fish excrement and excess feed are released into open water with often severe environmental consequences, especially for benthic organisms, which live in, on, or near the bottom of aquatic environments, such as lobsters. Many commercial aquaculture operations, including salmon production systems, utilize large amounts of wild captured fish that are processed for use as feed. Numerous traditional cultures developed aquaculture systems utilizing natural inputs and ecological cycles to raise high quality food with minimal adverse environmental impact. The USDA National Organic Standards Board is currently considering materials/substances to be allowed in certified organic aquaculture systems, after the Board adopted standards for these systems in 2007-8 (NOSB recommendations can be read here, here and here).

A statement released by Cooke Aquaculture CEO Glenn Cooke on November 3 cites legal constraints in declining to respond to the specific charges in the indictment. Mr. Cooke stated, “I can tell you that the substance they are talking about is something that is used regularly for agricultural purposes and on golf courses. Salmon farmers in many other countries are authorized to use it. We continue to encourage our governments to approve the treatment and management tools that our fish health and farming teams need to protect the health of our fish.â€

Total cypermethrin use in the United States is approximately 1.0 million pounds of active ingredient (a.i.) per year. Approximately 140,000 pounds a.i. are used in agricultural crops, mainly on cotton (110,000 pounds), with minor uses on pecans, peanuts, broccoli and sweet corn. The great majority of cypermethrin use occurs in non-agricultural settings, including commercial, industrial, and residential sites. Indoor pest control -mainly for control of ants, cockroaches, and fleas- accounts for about 110,000 pounds a.i., while outdoor structural, perimeter, and turf uses for control of subterranean termites and other insect pests accounts for nearly 750,000 pounds.

However, despite the widespread use of these chemicals, the deleterious and often fatal effects of pesticides on non-target organisms are a chronic problem associated with releasing these toxic products into the environment. Aquatic environments are a common destination for pesticides that either run-off from terrestrial applications or are applied directly to water and the amount of pesticides found in American waterways is increasing. There is mounting evidence that pesticides used to control mosquito-borne West Nile virus are contributing to the decline of marine organisms, including lobsters.

Legal proceedings will commence in the New Brunswick provincial court in St. Stephen on December 13.

Source: Bangor Daily News

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share

11
Nov

Keep Organic Strong: Public Input Needed by Sunday, Nov. 13

(Beyond Pesticides, November 11, 2011) The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) will meet this month to decide on a range of issues regarding the future of organic food and farming in the U.S. The NOSB will vote to allow or prohibit substances and practices in certified organic food and farming after considering input from the public. Your participation is vital to this process. Public input can be highly influential to the development of organic standards, as farmers and consumers relay their ideas to the board for consideration, but only if you speak up. The public comment period closes after this Sunday, November 13. Take Action.

There is a wide range of issues that the board is considering for this meeting including pest control materials, inputs in processed food, internal board procedures, and many others. You can access background on these issues on our Keeping Organic Strong webpage and then send comments into USDA by the end of Sunday, November 13. It’s easy.

Submit your comments using this form. This will bring you to a form in which to fill out your personal information and type your comment. When filling out your personal information, you only need to fill in the fields with a blue asterisk next to the label. Other fields, such as Submitter’s Representative and Government Agency should be left blank. Under Organization Name, enter the name of the group you are representing or “None†or “Private Citizen†if you are representing only yourself. You may then type your comment or upload it as a separate file. Finish by clicking the orange Submit button.

We recommend using these guidelines and referring back to the organic law in order to organize your thoughts in your comments. As our comments demonstrate, this will help to clearly and succinctly lay out your points and make it easier for NOSB members to follow your reasoning.

Here is our commentary on just a few of the pressing issues under consideration:

Transparency in Decision Making — Committee Recommendation, Beyond Pesticides comments
The Policy Development Committee has proposed a recommendation that would enhance the transparency of the NOSB’s committee meetings and decision processes. Specifically, the committee has recommended that full, accurate minutes be taken on Committee meetings and conference calls that reflect the source of positions taken on issues, and that minutes, reports, transcripts, and other documents related to board decisions be made freely accessible to the public in hard copy as well as electronically through the World Wide Web. We fully support this recommendation and encourage further transparency in any way it can be achieved. The development or organic standards is intended to be a public stakeholder process in which anyone who has an interest in organic integrity and the future of the organic sector can also have a voice in the process. Increased transparency allows interested parties to give more informed and effective input, leading to more agreeable results for all involved.

Odorized Propane — Committee Recommendation, Beyond Pesticides comments
A petition was submitted to the Crops Committee to allow propane to be exploded in burrows in order to control underground rodents. We support the Committee’s decision to deny the petition and not allow such explosions for a number of reasons. Firstly, exploding underground burrows does not fall under any category of allowed synthetic substances in the Organic Foods Production Act.

Beyond the legal considerations, controlling rodents by essentially bombing their habitats is wildly inconsistent with organic principles and ideals of minimizing environmental impact and encouraging beneficial natural interactions. Such practices would kill or harm any organisms in the surrounding area, including those in the soil, as well a number of beneficial endangered species which also burrow or live underground. The potential for causing fires and the safety risks to the operator are further concerns around the use of propane devices.

There is also a full range of alternative materials and methods already allowed in organic systems which can effectively control rodents, including habitat modification, traps, introduction of predators (such as dogs), rodenticide baits, and many others. These alternatives, in a more effective and less costly manner, achieve with management what propane would achieve with off-farm synthetic inputs.

Because of the likely widespread damage to ecosystems, the availability of alternatives, and the unpredictable nature of the use of such a material combined with its questionable efficacy, we strongly recommend supporting the Committee’s decision and denying the use of this material.

Organic Research Priorities — Committee Discussion Document, Beyond Pesticides Comments
The Materials Committee proposed a discussion document which “shares the committee’s current thinking on a process to collect, prioritize, and maintain research needs related to organic production methods and materials.†We are happy to see the NOSB address the issue of setting research priorities. Like the committee, we welcome the prospect of a process that will help bring more research efforts to troublesome problems in organic production and handling. We look forward to a time when disagreements will be decreased by the availability of research into alternatives that everyone can support.

We would also particularly like to request better quality control over the technical reviews that are received by the committees scientifically evaluating particular substances with regards to their compatibility with organic systems. These reviews are highly influential in the board’s evaluation of particular substances and they should fully address all of the pertinent issues. We would support a return to the use of Technical Advisory Panels such as were used in previous years, which incorporate more diverse viewpoints and expertise.

Here are the rest of the issues for this meeting:

Copper Sulfate
List 3 Inert Ingredients
Ammonium Nonanoate
Ozone
Peracetic Acid
Calcium Chloride
Indole-3-butyric Acid (IBA)
Organic Aquaculture
Sulfites in Wine
Chlorine
ARA and DHA
Public Comment Procedures
Conflict of Interest Policy

We encourage you to use and build upon our commentary in making your own comments.

We share your enthusiasm for organic practices as the solution to pesticide pollution, to advance clean food, air, water, and a sustainable environment —and want to ensure that organic grows stronger every day. But, this won’t happen without your involvement.

Take action now.

Share

10
Nov

New Studies Dispel Myth of Organic ‘Elitism’

(Beyond Pesticides, November 10, 2011) Two new studies released last week add further proof that the popularity of organic food is not just an elitist trend. One report by the Organic Trade Association (OTA), The 2011 U.S. Families’ Organic Attitudes and Beliefs Study, finds that 78 percent of U.S. families purchase organic food. Another study by SCALE, Inc. finds that organic food is generally cheaper at farmers markets than at grocery stores in Southeast U.S.

OTA partnered with KIWI Magazine, and polled nearly 1,300 U.S. families about their attitudes and behaviors relating to organic food. The total sample reflects the target population of U.S. households with a confidence interval of +/-3% at the 95% confidence level. This is the third year the study has been conducted. According to OTA, it contains in-depth information about organic consumers’ demographics, purchase motivation, understanding of organic, willingness to substitute when organic is not available, and attitudes about genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

The other study, Is Local Food Affordable for Ordinary Folks?, compares farmers markets and supermarkets throughout 19 different communities in six Southeast states, including Virginia, Tennessee, West Virginia, Kentucky, North Carolina and South Carolina. Though the study focuses on local foods, it did find that when organic food was available at the market, it was generally around 16% less expensive than at supermarkets in 88% of the communities examined.

This research is in line with previous reports on the growing market of organic agriculture. A poll conducted this summer by Thompson-Reuters and National Public Radio (NPR) found that 58% of respondents say they choose organic over conventionally produced foods when they have the opportunity. Other research suggests that U.S. retail sales of organic sales are projected to double in the next few years, despite the lagging economy.

“In a time when the severity of the economy means making tough choices, it is extremely encouraging to see consumers vote with their values by including quality organic products in their shopping carts,†said Christine Bushway, OTA’s Executive Director and CEO. The finding is one of many contained in OTA’s newly released 2011 U.S. Families’ Organic Attitudes and Beliefs Study. “It’s clear that with more than three-quarters of U.S. families choosing organic, this has moved way beyond a niche market,†Ms. Bushway added.

According to the OTA study, four in ten families indicate that they buy more organic products than they did a year ago. The findings are in line with those in OTA’s 2011 Organic Industry Survey, which revealed that the U.S. organic industry grew at a rate of nearly eight percent in 2010. Fueled by consumer choice and demand, the organic sector is one of the few components of the U.S. economy that continues to add jobs.

Nearly half — 48 percent — of parents surveyed in the OTA poll reveal that their strongest motivator for buying organic is their belief that organic products “are healthier for me and my children.†Other motivators for purchasing organic included concern over the effects of pesticides, hormones and antibiotics on children, and the desire to avoid highly processed or artificial ingredients.

Organic foods have been shown to reduce dietary pesticide exposure. A study published in 2008 finds that children who eat a conventional diet of food produced with chemical-intensive practices carry residues of organophosphate pesticides that are reduced or eliminated when they switch to an organic diet. A follow up study to assess children’s dietary exposure throughout the year was conducted two years later in 2010 using the same set of children. Researchers found that consumption of certain foods varied greatly by season and that government agencies may be underestimating children’s dietary exposure to pesticides, and therefore the inherent risks to children’s health. Another study finds that converting the nation’s eight million acres of produce farms to organic would reduce pesticide dietary risks significantly.

Beyond Pesticides supports organic agriculture not only for the benefits to human health, but also as effecting good land stewardship and a reduction in hazardous chemical exposures for workers on the farm. The pesticide reform movement, citing pesticide problems associated with chemical agriculture, from groundwater contamination and runoff to drift, views organic as the solution to a serious public health and environmental threat. For more information on the importance of choosing organic see our Eating with a Conscience page. For more information on organic food and farming, visit our organic program page.

Want to do more? There are a couple of important actions right now that you can take to support organic agriculture.

Take Action:

Keep Organic Strong. Public participation is vital to the development of organic standards. Make your voice heard at the upcoming National Organic Standards meeting and send your public comment by November 13, and;

Tell your legislators to support the Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act (LFFJA), S. 1773 and H.R. 3286, which is a comprehensive bill intended for inclusion in the 2012 Farm Bill. The legislation helps farmers and ranchers by addressing production, aggregation, processing, marketing, and distribution needs to access growing local and regional food markets. The bill would provide critical support for a number of programs that benefit organic farmers and the organic industry, as well. It also assists consumers by improving access to healthy food. The measure provides secure farm bill funding for critically important programs that support organic and family farms, expand new farming opportunities, create rural jobs, and invest in the local food and agriculture economy.

Sources: OTA Press Release, SCALE, Inc. Press Release

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share

09
Nov

European Food Still Heavily Contaminated With Dangerous Cocktails Of Pesticides

(Beyond Pesticides, November 9, 2011) A 2009 European Union (EU) report on pesticide residues, published yesterday by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), shows food on the European market is still heavily contaminated with cocktails of pesticides. The percentage of EU food in shops and markets with multiple residues remains at a high level of 25.1%, meaning only a slight improvement in the last five years of reporting. The highest reported number of pesticide chemical residues in one food item remains at 26: One sample analyzed had 26 different pesticides!

Like the U.S. where consumers are exposed through food and drinking water to a variety of chemical mixtures of pesticide food residues, EU citizens also continue to be exposed to mixtures of pesticides on a daily basis. According to the report , compliance with the legal maximum residue levels (MRLs) for pesticides in food rose to 97.4 percent of the analyzed samples in 2009, up by about one percentage point from 2008, EFSA said.

However, like their counterparts in the U.S., the regulatory entities EFSA and European Commission still do not protect people against the effects of mixtures. Health standards for pesticide residues do not take these effects into account. Remarkably, EFSA is delaying the implementation of the 2005 residue directive rules that oblige regulators to take mixture effects into account. People, especially children and the unborn, will be put at unknown but potentially high risks by this delay of over six years.

Exceedances of the food standards in the national residue monitoring programs seem to have gone down from 3.5% in 2008 to 2.6% in 2009, but a comparison is not possible given the massive changes of food standards in 2009. Unfortunately, thousands of food standards have been relaxed by EFSA to the highest level among all the European Member states. While EFSA now recognizes that this approach was not justified and food standards are made stricter again, the massive relaxation remains. On the positive side in the 2009 monitoring report, the percentage of food items on the European market without measurable residues rose slightly to 57.5%, up from around 53% in 2008 and 2007.

Pesticide residues, most as chemical mixtures that have not been evaluated for potential cumulative and synergistic effects, continue to contaminate food and drinking water in the U.S. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as part of a pesticide’s registration, allows a certain concentration of a pesticide on food, known as the food tolerance level. Pesticide residues in food are regulated by the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA), but the tolerance levels assigned for certain pesticides, though determined “allowable,†still pose potential health risks. Studies show that a combination of multiple chemical residues can produce heightened toxicity. Children are particularly susceptible to the effects of pesticide exposure because they have developing organ systems that are more vulnerable and less able to detoxify toxic chemicals. Read more at “Children and Pesticides Don’t Mix.†Beyond Pesticides’ Eating with a Conscience guide describes a food production system that enables toxic pesticide use both domestically in the U.S. and internationally. See Organic Food: Eating with a Conscience. The only way to avoid toxic pesticide residues is to switch to organic foods.

As organic agriculture continues to grow and evolve, researchers are continuing to find new evidence of the benefits of choosing and growing organic foods, and the benefits of organic agriculture extend to everyone. Organic foods have been shown to reduce dietary pesticide exposure. A study published in 2008 finds that children who eat a conventional diet of food produced with chemical-intensive practices carry residues of organophosphate pesticides that are reduced or eliminated when they switch to an organic diet. Another study finds that converting the nation’s eight million acres of produce farms to organic would reduce pesticide dietary risks significantly. On conventional farms, dangerous pesticide use is a danger to farmworkers, wildlife including endangered animals, as well as the water supply, and people especially children living in the area.
For more on organic food, visit the Organic program page.

Take Action: The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) will meet in November to decide on a range of issues regarding the future of organic food and farming in the United States. Public participation is vital to the development of organic standards, as farmers and consumers relay their ideas to the board for consideration. Take action now.

Source: Pan-Europe Press Release

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share

08
Nov

Join Health and Environmental Advocates in Calling on EPA to Ban Atrazine

(Beyond Pesticides, November 8, 2011) The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a petition to ban the endocrine (hormone) disrupting herbicide atrazine on September 14, 2011, opening a 60-day comment period for the public to weigh-in on the issue that ends Friday. Tell EPA that because atrazine poses unacceptable risks to humans and wildlife, the agency should remove this hazardous pesticide from the market immediately. Submit comments directly to EPA’s atrazine petition docket by November 14, 2011 or sign your organization or business onto Beyond Pesticides’ comments by Friday, November 11.

According to its Federal Register notice, EPA received a petition from the non-profit organization Save the Frogs that includes over 10,000 signatures and select statements from the public, as well as two brief summaries of published literature, one by Jason Rohr, PhD (University of South Florida), and one by Tyrone Hayes, PhD (University of California, Berkeley), that is co-authored by 39 other scientists. In conjunction with the petition, EPA received nearly 50,000 emails from supporters of the Center for Biological Diversity and the Natural Resources Defense Council requesting that EPA “immediately take steps to phase out atrazine use in the United States,†stating that atrazine poses an unreasonable risk to the environment. The emails express concern for impacts on amphibians and other aquatic species as well as concern for potential risks to human health.

In its comments to EPA, Beyond Pesticides renews its call for the agency to ban atrazine and cites new research which adds to the body of evidence showing that this herbicide should never have been allowed on the market. Read an excerpt below:

Atrazine is a widely used herbicide whose use over the decades has led to widespread environmental contamination that threatens wildlife as well as public health. About 73-78 million pounds of atrazine are used in the U.S. annually, primarily on corn. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has routinely found atrazine in rivers and other water bodies at constant levels near or above EPA’s levels of concern. USGS researchers have also found atrazine to adversely affect aquatic organisms.

Atrazine is a potent endocrine disruptor with strong associations with birth defects, cancer, sex reversal and hermaphroditism in animals whose risk to environmental and human health is exacerbated by pervasive surface, ground and drinking water contamination. The European Union and countries across the globe have banned atrazine, however the agency continues to put U.S. residents and the environment in harm’s way with the continued use of atrazine.

In the past, Beyond Pesticides has commented to the agency that atrazine use in the U.S. should be halted. Beyond Pesticides still believes that atrazine poses unreasonable risks to humans and the environment and that risk mitigation measures proposed by EPA and the registrants fail to protect atrazine users and the general public. We hope the agency will take a look again at [studies cited in the comments] and reconsider the current registration on atrazine.

Beyond Pesticides comments highlight studies published in the scientific literature since EPA began reevaluating atrazine under its registration review process in 2009. This research includes a 2011 study published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, showing that prenatal exposure to atrazine is linked to small head circumference and fetal growth restriction; a study published in the journal Reproductive Toxicology in 2010 finds male rats prenatally exposed to low doses of atrazine are more likely to develop prostate inflammation and to go through puberty later than non-exposed animals; and, a 2010 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences finds that male frogs exposed to atrazine can become so completely female that they can mate and lay viable eggs.

Because it has a tendency to persist in soils and move with water, atrazine washes into surface water and leaches into groundwater, and often finds its way into municipal drinking water. It is the most commonly detected pesticide in rivers, streams, and wells. Atrazine poses unreasonable risks to humans and wildlife at concentrations detected in the environment. Current and anticipated risk mitigation measures, including current best management practices, proposed by EPA and registrants, fail to protect. The agency must move quickly to conclude its review of atrazine and find an “unreasonable adverse effect†finding and cancel its registration.

The European Union banned atrazine in 2004 after repeated testing found the herbicide in drinking water supplies, and health officials were unable to find sufficient evidence that the chemical is safe. In much of Europe the burden of proof falls on the pesticide manufacturer to prove it is safe, unlike in the U.S. where EPA has assumed the burden of proving a pesticide does not meet acceptable risk standards before removing it through regulatory action.

For more information on atrazine, please see its profile in the Pesticide Gateway. Submit comments directly to EPA’s atrazine petition docket by Monday, November 14 or sign your organization or business onto Beyond Pesticides’ comments by Friday, November 11.

Share

07
Nov

Genetically Engineered Crops to Boost Use of 2, 4-D and Dicamba

(Beyond Pesticides, November 7) Once heralded as a breakthrough for reducing the rates and toxicity of the pesticides applied by farmers, genetically engineered (GE) crops are perversely leading to renewed dependency on the very herbicides they were claimed to make obsolete. Growing recognition that pervasive planting of “Round-Up Ready†corn, soybeans and cotton is accelerating weed resistance is prompting GE seed companies to rush to market ‘stacked’ varieties that are resistant to additional herbicides, including 2, 4-D and dicamba. Farmers planting the stacked varieties will be spraying these older herbicides in addition to glyphosate, which most commodity crops have already been engineered to tolerate. Professor David A. Mortensen of Pennsylvania State University has estimated that adoption of Round-Up Ready and 2, 4-D or dicamba resistant stacked varieties in soybeans could result in a 70% increase in herbicide use in a relatively short time.

The St. Louis Pots-Dispatch reported on progress that multinational chemical corporations Dow AgroSciences, BASF, and Monsanto are making to bring multi-herbicide resistant varieties to market. Under separate arrangements with each company, Monsanto adds glyphosate resistance to seeds that are simultaneously engineered to resist other herbicides. In October, Dow AgroSciences obtained a global patent on its Enlist Duo technology, which packages an herbicide containing 2, 4-D and glyphosate with seeds engineered to tolerate both materials. Commercial release of an Enlist Duo corn variety is anticipated for 2013 with similarly engineered soybeans projected to become available in 2015.

2, 4-D is a highly toxic chemical which has been linked to cancer, reproductive effects, endocrine disruption, and kidney and liver damage. It is also neurotoxic and is toxic to beneficial insects (such as bees), earthworms, birds, and fish. Scientific studies have confirmed significantly elevated rates of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma for farmers who use 2, 4-D.

Monsanto has been partnering with BASF on dicamba and glyphosate tolerant crop varieties since 2009 with a focus on soybeans, cotton, and corn. Commercial release of engineered seeds for these crops is projected for the mid-point of this decade. Dicamba is a neurotoxic chlorinated benzoic acid herbicide that the Environmental Protection Agency classifies as acute toxicity class III, slightly toxic. The material is a recognized eye irritant, moderately persistent in the environment and highly mobile in both soil and water. Chronic exposure is linked to reproductive and developmental effects.

Concern about an impending spike in 2, 4-D and dicamba usage is exacerbated by the timing of the applications for the new herbicides that combine these materials with glyphosate. These new blended herbicides will be sprayed repeatedly during the growing season after weeds emerge and begin to compete with crops. Both 2, 4-D and dicamba are highly susceptible to drift and dicamba is known to volatilize (evaporate) and travel upwards of two miles from the point of application. The spraying of more 2, 4-D and dicamba during periods when specialty crops and home gardens are at their greatest risk of exposure is likely to increase the incidence of pesticide contamination and resultant damages.

GE crops have also yet to deliver on the early promises made by the biotechnology industry to increase crop yields. A recent report from the Union of Concerned Scientists evaluated the overall effect genetic engineering has had on crop yields in relation to other agricultural technologies. It reviewed two dozen academic studies of corn and soybeans, the two primary GE food and feed crops grown in the United States. The report concludes that GE herbicide-tolerant soybeans and herbicide-tolerant corn has not increased yields. Insect-resistant corn, meanwhile, has improved yields only marginally. The increase in yields for both crops over the last 13 years, the report finds, is largely due to traditional breeding or improvements in agricultural practices.

Farmers do not have to remain stuck on a pesticide treadmill that demands ever greater amounts of synthetic inputs and rewards chemical suppliers at the expense of farm profitability and the environment. Organic agriculture is an ecologically-based management system that prioritizes cultural, biological, and mechanical production practices and natural inputs. By strengthening on-farm resources, such as soil fertility, pasture and biodiversity, organic farmers can minimize and even avoid the production challenges that chemical inputs such as synthetic pesticides, fertilizers and antibiotics are marketed as solving.

Source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Share

04
Nov

Legislation Introduced in Congress to Support Local and Organic Food

(Beyond Pesticides, November 4, 2011) On Tuesday, November 1, Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Representative Chellie Pingree of Maine along with 35 original co-sponsors, introduced the Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act (LFFJA) — S. 1773 and H.R. 3286 — a comprehensive bill intended for inclusion in the 2012 Farm Bill. The legislation helps farmers and ranchers by addressing production, aggregation, processing, marketing, and distribution needs to access growing local and regional food markets. The bill would provide critical support for a number of programs that benefit organic farmers and the organic industry, as well. It also assists consumers by improving access to healthy food. The measure provides secure farm bill funding for critically important programs that support organic and family farms, expand new farming opportunities, create rural jobs, and invest in the local food and agriculture economy. Take action.

Among the provisions of the bill that would benefit organic producers are an increase in funding and payment caps for certification assistance, elimination of surcharges on crop insurance for organic farmers and development of more accurate price estimates, and expansion of specialty crop block grants that often are awarded to organic operations (“specialty crops†being the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s term for fruits and vegetables).

The bill would expand the National Organic Certification Cost Share Program (NOCCSP), a key initiative which uses funds allocated through the farm bill to provide financial and technical assistance to producers as they seek to certify or recertify their organic operation. Many farmers, especially new farmers or those with small acreages, who are interested in transitioning to organic production face hurdles in initial investment, due in part to the costs of obtaining certification. Even existing operations can have difficulty with the costs of such certification expenses as pesticide residue testing. NOCCSP encourages farmers to obtain, or continue obtaining, certification by lessening these costs, thereby helping the organic sector to continue its growth.

Currently, NOCCSP is funded with a one-time allotment from the 2008 farm bill of $22 million through 2012, with $4.87 million allocated by Congress for fiscal year 2010. LFFJA would increase funding for the program and spread it out evenly at $10 million a year. Additionally, the program contains a cap on how much money a single producer can receive in a given year. Currently the cap stands at $750 per year, but LFFJA would increase that cap to $1,000 per year per producer.

Liana Hoodes, Director of the National Organic Coalition, explains, “NOCCSP is the only program that assists organic farmers with their cost of certification. This is especially important to encourage small and medium-size organic farms to transition to organic in order to meet the growing consumer demand and to maintain a diversity in scale of organic operations.â€

Crop insurance is a key part of many farm operations, as it protects farmers from natural disasters, crop loss, or other damages that could result in serious financial loss. As currently administered by the USDA Risk Management Agency, the crop insurance program requires organic farmers to pay a surcharge on their insurance. In addition, organic crops are not insured at the prices that they actually receive on the market, but rather at the same rates that a conventional commodity would receive. This means that an organic farmer who experienced a crop loss and received compensation through crop insurance would receive significantly less money than if he or she had been able to actually sell the crops.

LFFJA seeks to correct both of the current imbalances in the crop insurance program by eliminating RMA’s surcharge on insuring organic crops and by developing a new price series for organic crop insurance that reflects the actual prices organic crops receive in the market.

The bill would also increase support for and coordinate administration of research on classically bred (not genetically engineered) varieties of plants and livestock for agriculture. This would help to counteract the growing dominance of genetically engineered seeds and plant varieties in the marketplace. Without easy access to classically bred crop varieties, farmers, especially organic, are put at a severe disadvantage in terms of their costs of production and seed procurement as well as what they are able to produce.

The bill contains numerous other provisions to enhance local, regional, and sustainable food systems as a whole, including support for small producers and beginning farmers, increased access to local food for low income communities, and increased research funding on sustainable food systems. The goal of the bill is to enhance food sovereignty by increasing the viability of local and sustainable food systems. It aims to increase development, infrastructure, and support for small diversified farmers producing food for their communities. See this fact sheet for further details on the specific programs and changes that the bill contains.

For more information on organic food and farming, visit our organic program page.

TAKE ACTION: Call or email your Senators and Representative and urge them to support these bills, S. 1773 and H.R. 3286, the Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act. Support for organic agriculture and local food systems is essential to ensuring a fair and sustainable future for all of us.

Source: National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share

03
Nov

State of Ohio Drops Label Restrictions on Organic Milk

(Beyond Pesticides, November 3, 2011) The State of Ohio announced Friday, October 28 it will rescind a regulation that has prohibited organic dairy product labeling from declaring that antibiotics, pesticides or synthetic hormones are not used. In a lawsuit filed by the Organic Trade Association (OTA), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals found that proposed restrictions violate the First Amendment of the constitution. As a result, Ohio has abandoned the rule, thus allowing labeling to proudly state that organic dairy products are produced in accordance with federal organic standards under the Organic Foods Production Act, and therefore without the use of synthetic growth hormones or antibiotics.

“This is significant for all of us who support what the organic foods are about, and for consumers who carefully read food labels to find out what’s in their food and how it’s produced,†said Christine Bushway, Executive Director and CEO for OTA. “The Sixth Circuit opinion made it clear that states cannot unduly restrict organic labels or consumers’ right to know how their food is produced, and the State of Ohio’s actions today make it clear that the fight to keep labels accurate by OTA, its members, farmers, and consumers was worth it.â€

In 2008, the State of Ohio issued an emergency regulation that restricted the free speech rights of organic and conventional farmers and marketers of milk within the State of Ohio. The regulation illegally restricted the right of farmers and marketers to state that some dairy products are produced without the use of synthetic and artificial ingredients.

OTA and its members, including Horizon Organic ®, Organic Valley ®, and Stonyfield Farm ®, appealed a lower court decision that upheld the rule in question to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. In 2010, the Sixth Circuit reversed the lower court decision, agreeing that consumers have a right to know how their dairy products are produced. Critical to the decision was the Court’s reliance on an amicus brief filed by the Center for Food Safety and other organizations that argued that milk produced with synthetic hormones is different than milk produced without it (as all organic milk is).

“Ohio’s abandonment of this misguided rule is a victory for consumers, farmers and manufacturers alike,†said Ms. Bushway, She added, “The organic label is a federally regulated program that provides consumers with the knowledge that their food is produced without the use of antibiotics, pesticides or added growth hormones. Consumers have the right to make informed choices about the foods they eat, and farmers and manufacturers can continue to communicate truthfully with consumers.â€

There are many reasons to choose and grow organic foods. Researchers continue to find new evidence of the benefits of organic, including a study that found that organically produced strawberries had higher antioxidant activity, longer shelf life, and fared better in taste tests than conventional berries. Soils on the organic farms are also found to be healthier with higher organic matter, and greater microbial biodiversity. Last spring, two studies performed independently of each other confirm that organically produced food is safer and can actually save money in the long term. Organic agriculture embodies an ecological approach to farming that does not rely on or permit toxic pesticides, chemical fertilizers, genetically engineered organisms, antibiotics, sewage sludge, or irradiation. For more information about why organic is the right choice see Beyond Pesticides’ Organic Food: Eating with a Conscience guide.

Conventional, chemical-intensive agriculture depends on toxic chemicals that poison the soil, as well as the air, water, and consumers of the crops. Organic farmers can use natural pesticides, after exhausting other strategies including crop rotation, cultural practices, beneficial species, etc. However, synthetic chemicals can only be used in organic farming and processing if they are approved by the USDA National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), a process that includes a detailed checklist of possible health and environmental impacts and considers the need for the chemical.

The organic regulatory process provides numerous opportunities for the public to weigh in on what is allowable in organic production. USDA maintains a National List, set by the NOSB, of the synthetic substances that may be used and the non-synthetic substances that may not be used in organic production and handling. The Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA) and NOP regulations provide for the sunsetting of listed substances every five years and relies on public comment in evaluating their continuing uses. The public may also file a petition to amend the National List. In both cases, sunset and petition, the NOSB is authorized by OFPA to determine a substance’s status.

TAKE ACTION: Want to make your voice heard? Public participation is vital to the development of organic standards, as farmers and consumers relay their ideas to the board for consideration. The NOSB will meet at the end of this month to decide on a range of issues affecting the future of organic food and farming in the United States. The board will vote to allow or prohibit substances and practices in certified organic food and farming after considering input from any interested members of the public, such as farmers, consumers, food processors, or professionals. Submit your comments to the NOSB regarding nutrient additives, or any other topic that will be debated, by November 13, 2011 in order to have them considered before the meeting. Be sure to specify which issue you are commenting on.

For more information on how you can be involved with the organic regulatory process, see Beyond Pesticides’ Organic Integrity program page.

Source: OTA Press release

All other unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides

Share

02
Nov

Court Upholds Protection for Salmon Protections

(Beyond Pesticides, November 2, 2011) On Monday, a federal judge rejected a lawsuit brought by Dow AgroSciences challenging pesticide application restrictions to protect salmon and upheld the measures recommended by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to protect endangered salmon and steelhead from three highly toxic pesticides: chlorpyrifos, diazinon, and malathion.

The restrictions, recommended by NMFS’s Biological Opinion in 2008, ban the ground spraying of the three commonly used organophosphate agricultural insecticides within 500 feet of any salmon-bearing waterway, and aerial spraying within 1,000 feet. NMFS has issued four Biological Opinions, the latest on June 2011, which call for several limitations on aerial spraying and ground application of the pesticides near salmon waters, as well as buffer zones around salmon waters and ditches that drain to salmon habitat, among others. EPA was court ordered to consult with NMFS to identify measures needed to protect salmon and steelhead from the pesticides as a result of a 2002 and 2007 lawsuit. Pesticide manufacturers have been willfully ignoring and challenging NMFS’s findings. Dow AgroSciences alleged that NMFS used bad data and modeling and that the proposed buffers are far too large. Earthjustice, representing Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP), Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, and Defenders of Wildlife, intervened in the case to defend important safeguards for west coast salmon and the fisheries jobs they support.

According to NCAP, the court’s ruling, issued by Judge Alexander Williams, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, turns back industry’s efforts to undermine no-spray buffer zones and other measures required to protect imperiled salmon from exposure to the organophosphate pesticides chlorpyrifos, diazinon, and malathion. These pesticides are known to contaminate waterways throughout California and the Pacific Northwest.

“The Court’s decision is a victory for everyone’s health,†said Aimee Code with the Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides. “It foiled the pesticide industry’s attempt to evade the laws that protect both people and wildlife.â€

The case stems from a lawsuit originally filed by conservation and fishing groups represented by Earthjustice in 2001. In response to that litigation, the fishery experts at NMFS evaluated these pesticides and determined that no-spray buffer zones next to streams and vegetated strips to catch pesticide-laden runoff from fields are needed to protect salmon. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was tasked with implementation of the pesticide restrictions. However, to date, EPA has still not taken any actions to implement any of these measures. In a May 14, 2010 letter to NMFS, EPA explained how the agency planned to achieve protection goals through the methods outlined by NMFS in the Biological Opinions or by alternative methods that EPA’s scientific analyses determined will achieve the same purpose. At the same time, in an act of defiance, Dow AgroSciences and Cheminova, manufacturers of the pesticides in question, stated in correspondence to the EPA dated May 7, 2010, that they were “baffled by the agency’s position,†saying that their products do not threaten endangered species. Citing their “solid scientific evidence,†that they claim is “far more complete than is reflected in the NMFS Biological Opinion,†they are not prepared to make the registration revisions [to their products] described in the EPA’s April 29, 2010 and November 2009 requests.

Also in 2010, a lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Washington as the fourth lawsuit brought against the EPA to restrict the pesticides diazinon, malathion, chlorpyrifos, carbaryl, carbofuran and methomyl in streams of endangered salmon and steelhead. The plaintiffs sought a judgment declaring that EPA’s failure to implement the organophosphate (OP) and carbamate biological opinions issued by the NMFS violates the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and a judgment declaring that EPA is taking listed salmonids in violation of the ESA. The lawsuit sought an order vacating and enjoining EPA’s authorization of the uses of diazinon, malathion, chlorpyrifos, carbaryl, carbofuran, and methomyl that do not comply with the recommended mitigation measures until such time as EPA has put in place permanent measures that ensure against likely jeopardy to listed salmon and steelhead or adverse modification of their critical habitat, and an order compelling EPA to put in place such permanent measures within one year.

In a similar issue, a NMFS draft Biological Opinion found that the issuance of the proposed pesticides general permit by EPA is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of endangered and threatened species and cause the destruction or modification of critical habitat of the species without the implementation of a reasonable and prudent alternative (RPA). NMFS stated that pesticide discharges were resulting in exposures to pesticide pollutants in concentrations, durations or frequencies that would cause adverse effects to ESA listed species or designated critical habitat. The controversial pesticide general permit went into effect October 31, 2011 after months long battle in Congress to have the water protections revoked.

The pesticides that have been reviewed so far are some of the most dangerous chemicals used today. Chlorpyrifos, diazinon, malathion, carbaryl, carbofuran, and methomyl are neurotoxic and pose serious risks to both humans and wildlife. While many of these pesticides have been phased out for residential use, they continue to expose wildlife and farmworkers through their use in agriculture. Studies have shown that mixtures of organophosphate and carbamate pesticides cause more harm to endangered salmon than individual pesticide exposure and are commonly detected in freshwater habitats that support these threatened and endangered species.

Source: NCAP

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides

Share

01
Nov

Senate Negotiations Break Down, Clean Water Act Pesticide Permits Take Effect

(Beyond Pesticides, November 1, 2011) With negotiations to delay the court-ordered Clean Water Act (CWA) permits for pesticide applications breaking down in the U.S. Senate, the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Pesticides General Permit (PGP) will take effect today. The PGP, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit, covers most pesticide applications to water, including mosquito and other flying insect pest control, aquatic weed and algae control, aquatic nuisance animal control, and forest canopy pest control. Legislation to eliminate the permit requirement, the so-called Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act (HR 872), passed the U.S. House in April 2011. Similar legislation was introduced by Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS) in the Senate and passed through the Senate Agriculture Committee under the leadership of Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), but a hold was put on the bill by Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Ben Cardin (D-MD). According to Environment and Energy (E&E) Daily, the four Senators’ staff have been working on a compromise, but negotiations have reportedly broken down.

E&E Daily reports that last week, the two sides appeared to be close to a deal. In exchange for a two-year moratorium on the new permit requirement, a national survey would be conducted on pesticide contamination to help determine if such a permit is necessary. But last Friday, Senator Roberts pulled the plug on that agreement. In a statement, Senator Roberts said, “Attempts to use a moratorium to leverage a controversial and overly broad study that threatens agriculture production will only increase confusion facing our farmers, ranchers and state and local health agencies.” While the PGP will take effect today, Senator Roberts and others are expected to continue a legislative effort to repeal CWA protections from pesticides.

EPA first proposed draft language for the PGP in June 2010. Its decision to issue a permit stems from a 2009 court decision in the case of the National Cotton Council et al. v. EPA in which the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that pesticide discharges into water are pollutants and require CWA permits. This ruling overturned the Bush administration policy that exempted pesticides from regulation under the CWA, and instead applied the less protective standards of the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). CWA uses a kind of health-based standard known as maximum contamination levels to protect waterways and requires permits when chemicals are directly deposited into rivers, lakes and streams, while FIFRA uses a highly generalized risk assessment that does not consider safer alternatives.

EPA will issue permits in territories, Indian Country Lands, six states, and the District of Columbia where the agency is the NPDES permitting authority. EPA is working closely with the other 44 states as they develop their own permit regulations. The PGP does not authorize coverage for discharges of pesticides or their degradates to waters already impaired by these specific pesticides or degradates or discharges to outstanding national resource waters. These discharges will require coverage under the individual NPDES permits, rather than a general permit. Also outside the scope of this permit are terrestrial applications to control pests on agricultural crops or forest floors. Irrigation return flows and agricultural stormwater runoff do not require NPDES permits, even when they contain pesticides or pesticide residues, as the CWA specifically exempts these categories of discharges from requiring NPDES permit coverage.

Under the PGP, pesticide applicators will be required to reduce pesticide discharges by using the lowest effective amount of pesticide, and prevent leaks and spills, in addition to reporting any adverse incidents. Pesticide applicators that exceed annual treatment area threshold would also be required to apply integrated pest management (IPM) practices, as defined by the agency. EPA’s brand of IPM is “a program of prevention, monitoring, and control, that when done correctly can greatly reduce or eliminate the amount of pesticides used.†Before the application of a pesticide, the applicator would be required to identify the specific pests, and causes of infestation. The pesticide applicator must evaluate following management options: (1) no action, (2) preventive measures, (3) mechanical control, (4) cultural methods, and (5) biological control agents; before selecting a pesticide. EPA estimates the regulations will affect 365,000 pesticide applicators that use an estimated 5.6 million pounds of pesticides annually.

Because the fight for clean water is ongoing, Beyond Pesticides will keep you updated of future Congressional and Agency actions. Sign-up for action alerts to stay in the loop.

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides

Share

31
Oct

NJ School Pesticide Exposure Incident Reinforces Need for Policy

(Beyond Pesticides, October 31, 2011) The Borough Council of Oradell, NJ has pledged to review the use of pesticides on public grounds following an incident in which children may have been allowed to prematurely re-enter an herbicide-treated soccer field. This incident recalls the recently reported exposure and poisoning that occurred in Ohio a few weeks ago, and echoes the need for a comprehensive national policy to protect children from harmful and unnecessary exposure to toxic chemicals. The on-line edition of The Record reported on October 25 that the Council acted in response to a complaint filed as a result of an herbicide application to Memorial Field on October 6. The complaint stated that despite numerous posted signs warning children should not to enter the treated area for 72 hours, two youth soccer teams were playing on the field six hours after the application. The complaint further stated that the town’s Department of Public Works had removed all but one of the warning signs by the next day when another soccer game was played. The Record also reported that the field is open and accessible to members of the general public.

Children are especially sensitive and vulnerable to pesticides because of their rapid development and behavior patterns. Adverse health effects, such as nausea, dizziness, respiratory problems, headaches, rashes, and mental disorientation, may appear even if a pesticide is applied according to label directions. Pesticide exposure can have long-term adverse effects, including damage to a child’s neurological, respiratory, immune, and endocrine system and increased asthma symptoms. Studies show that children living in households where pesticides are used suffer elevated rates of leukemia, brain cancer, and soft tissue sarcoma. For more information, see Beyond Pesticides’ fact sheet, “Children and Pesticides Don’t Mix.

The herbicide applicator provided information indicating that he had applied the formulated herbicide LESCO Eliminate LO Broadleaf Herbicide, which contains dicamba as one of three active ingredients. Dicamba is a neurotoxic chlorinated benzoic acid herbicide that the Environmental Protection Agency classifies as acute toxicity class III, slightly toxic. The material is a recognized eye irritant, moderately persistent in the environment and highly mobile in both soil and water. Chronic exposure is linked to reproductive and developmental effects. While there were no reported illnesses or adverse reactions to this incident, city officials acknowledged the need for a more coherent management strategy. Mayor Dianne Didio stated, “The borough is looking at ways to improve our communication and explore alternative methods…â€

New Jersey is one of several states that are actively considering requirements that prohibit unnecessary pesticide applications by schools and day care facilities. A measure entitled the Safe Playing Fields Act has been introduced in both houses of the state legislature and passed by the Senate Budget Committee on June 15. The bill would prohibit the use of lawn care pesticides on playgrounds and recreational fields, except as an emergency response to an immediate threat to human health, as determined by the municipal or county governing body in consultation with the local health officer or if required by law. The bill would also direct the Commissioner of Environmental Protection, in consultation with the Commissioner of Health and Senior Services, to adopt rules and regulations concerning pesticide application, record keeping, and staff and parental notification procedures at child care centers with the goal of mitigating potential health risks to young children.

Exposure to toxic pesticides and other chemicals while children are at school is an unacceptable and completely unnecessary risk. This incident should not have happened and supports the need for a national policy to protect every child in the United States. Most recently introduced in the last Congress, federal legislation sponsored by Rep. Rush Holt, the School Environment Protection Act (SEPA), would protect school children from pesticides used both indoors and on all school grounds nationwide. The legislation also bans the use of synthetic fertilizers. SEPA was first introduced in November 1999 in both the U.S. Senate and House; and has been reintroduced every Congressional session since. The bill language is based on state school pest management laws. It also is similar in structure to the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, which established a national committee to oversee the program as well as established a list of pesticides allowed for use within the program. A version of SEPA has passed the U.S. Senate twice since and, together with other legislation, indicates broad support for a national mandate to stop hazardous pesticide use in schools. To learn more about this legislation, see Beyond Pesticides’ SEPA webpage.

Source: NorthJersey.com

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share

28
Oct

Monsanto Invests in Pollinator Research, Ignores Effects of Pesticides

(Beyond Pesticides, October 28, 2011) St. Louis-based chemical and seed giant Monsanto Co. has purchased a company called Beeologics, which has developed a product intended to counteract viral agents that plague honey bee colonies in an attempt to stem the effects of Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). However, advocates wonder whether the antiviral agent will result in any significant decline of CCD when bees around the country and across the world continue to be exposed to highly toxic pesticides that are known to have serious effects on a range of pollinators, including honey bees.

Beeologics was founded in 2007 and is headquartered in both Florida and Israel. The company’s antiviral agent, called Remembee, is designed to fight a virus that is commonly thought to be a contributing factor to CCD. According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Monsanto spokesperson Kelly Powers said that, “I don’t need to tell you how important bees are to farmers who rely on pollination, and Remembee has great promise, pending approvals.†The product is currently being reviewed for potential commercial sale by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Efforts to counteract CCD are commendable, as a range of factors, including viruses as well as colony invaders such as the Varroa mite, are thought to contribute to CCD. However, doubt remains as to whether Monsanto recognizes the significant role that agricultural chemicals, especially pesticides, have on bee colonies.

CCD has devastated bees and beekeepers around the country in recent years, a phenomenon that that many scientists have tied to the use of the systemic neonicotinoid insecticides widely used in agriculture and gardens. Over the past five years, since the discovery of CCD, annual winter colony losses have hovered near the 30% mark. A report released jointly by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and the Apiary Inspectors of America (AIA) shows that losses of honey bee populations over the 2010/2011 winter remained abnormally high. According to the survey, 30% of managed honey bee colonies across the country were lost over last winter. The United Nations (UN) also revealed in a report that the collapse of honey bee colonies is now a global phenomenon.

Some European and U.S. scientists postulate that losses of biodiversity and food resources, due to climate change, have intensified the problem. Others believe that a rise in single-crop farming and modification of landscapes, as well as pathogens causing diseases like foulbrood and varroasis are responsible for the problem. While CCD appears to have multiple interacting causes, a range of evidence points to sub-lethal pesticide exposures and pathogens as important contributing factors.

Neonicotinoids, the particularly suspect class of insecticides, especially in combination with the dozens of other pesticides, have been found in honey bee hives and the use of chemicals in agriculture has been found to damage bees by weakening their immune systems. Laboratory studies show that some insecticides and fungicides can act together to be 1,000 times more toxic to bees. They can also affect the sense of direction, memory and brain metabolism, and herbicides and pesticides may reduce the availability of plants bees need for food and for the larval stages of some pollinators.

In December 2010, after the discovery of a leaked memo from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) citing flawed and missing scientific data regarding the registration of the neonicotinoid pesticide clothianidin, Beyond Pesticides, along with beekeepers and other environmentalists, called on EPA to remove clothianidin from the market. EPA responded by defending clothianidin and the agency’s pesticide review process, saying that they “are not aware of any data that reasonably demonstrates that bee colonies are subject to elevated losses due to chronic exposure to this pesticide.†However, the emerging science finds that pesticides like clothianidin and others mentioned above do in fact harm bees. See Beyond Pesticides’ factsheet on the connection between clothianidin and CCD.

For more information, on honeybees and pesticides visit Beyond Pesticides’ Pollinators and Pesticides page.

Source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share

27
Oct

Students Poisoned by Pesticides Sprayed on Playing Field Outside of Classroom

(Beyond Pesticides, October 27, 2011) Forty-seven students from Edgewood Middle School in St. Clair Township, Ohio, reportedly fell ill after the school’s hired pest control company sprayed the herbicide Momentum, which contains the toxic ingredients 2,4-D, triclopyr and clopyralid, on nearby playing fields to treat for clover and other weeds. The incident and others like it demonstrate the need for a comprehensive national policy to protect children from harmful and unnecessary exposure to toxic chemicals. Six students were taken to nearby hospitals and twenty-one students total were treated for symptoms, including headaches, breathing difficulties, nausea and dizziness.

Children are especially sensitive and vulnerable to pesticides because of their rapid development and behavior patterns. Adverse health effects, such as nausea, dizziness, respiratory problems, headaches, rashes, and mental disorientation, may appear even if a pesticide is applied according to label directions, which may have been the case in this situation. Pesticide exposure can have long-term adverse effects, including damage to a child’s neurological, respiratory, immune, and endocrine system and increased asthma symptoms. Studies show that children living in households where pesticides are used suffer elevated rates of leukemia, brain cancer, and soft tissue sarcoma. For more information, see Beyond Pesticides’ fact sheet, “Children and Pesticides Don’t Mix.

An odor was first detected by a student in a classroom where a few other students reportedly complained of headaches and coughing around 10:30 a.m. Tuesday October 11. The initial evacuation of the room was around 11 a.m., said John Thomas, a spokesman for the school district to the Dayton Daily News. Eventually, the odor filled the entire building which forced the evacuation of the entire school. Parents were advised to take affected students home, wash their clothes, have them shower and spend the rest of the day breathing fresh air.

Many of the symptoms that children suffered at Edgwood Middle School are common in school children and may also have other causes, which means that pesticide-related illnesses often go unrecognized and unreported. Emergency workers had not yet identified the source of the odor and what was making the students ill until after a crew in hazmat gear tested the air, at which point the six students were already sent to the hospital. Upon realizing that the source of the problem was a weedkiller, school officials were concerned that the children had been lead to the contaminated field: “Our biggest concern was when we got here we didn’t realize that the problem was outside,†St Clair Township Fire Chief Terry White told Cincinnati.com. By 1:30 p.m., school officials were told that the building was clear of residue and those students that didn’t go home went back inside.

Momentum, the herbicide that was sprayed on school playing fields to control clover and other weeds is made up of three active ingredients: 2,4-D, triclopyr and clopyralid. 2,4-D has been linked to cancer, reproductive effects, endocrine disruption, kidney and liver damage, is neurotoxic and toxic to beneficial insects (such as bees), earthworms, birds, and fish. Scientific studies have confirmed significantly higher rates of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma for farmers who use 2,4-D than those who don’t; dogs whose owners use 2,4-D on their lawns are more likely to develop canine malignant lymphoma than those whose owners do not. Despite the known health and environmental effects of 2,4-D, it is the top selling herbicide for non-agricultural use, such as lawns, in the United States. It is also the fifth most commonly used herbicide in the agricultural sector and total annual usage in the U.S. tops 40 million pounds.

Clopyralid is a carboxylic acid herbicide classified by EPA in acute toxicity class III as slightly toxic. Laboratory studies have shown that clopyralid is a severe eye irritant and dermal irritation has also been noted which can lead to skin sensitization for prolonged skin exposures. Some developmental and reproductive effects have been observed in laboratory animals. The livers and kidneys of rats as well as the livers of dogs were affected by changes in weight and decreased red blood cell counts. Another study found that weights of rabbit fetuses decreased at both low and high doses of clopyralid. Skeletal abnormalities were also observed in these fetuses at all doses.

Clopyralid is also a persistent herbicide that breaks down extremely slowly. The herbicide, which does not break down during the composting process, has been found in compost made from recycled grass, straw, and manure. In 2002, the state of Washington banned the use of clopyralid on lawns and turf in order to keep the chemical from contaminating compost supplies. That same year, California found that 65% of the compost samples tested positive for clopyralid, which led to the cancellation of residential uses for clopyralid in the state.

There are documented effects on reproduction, fetal development, and organ function, as well as irritation when exposed to high doses of the other active ingredient in the herbicide Momentum, triclopyr. Subchronic and chronic feeding studies in dogs and rodents found damage to both the kidney and liver. Data has also shown birth defects and adverse effects on reproduction associated with chronic exposure. Pregnant rodents exposed to the chemical had lower litter numbers and a higher incidence of birth abnormalities in offspring than did those which were not exposed. Triclopyr is generally considered to be non-carcinogenic, but several laboratory tests have shown an increase in the incidents of breast cancer and genetic damage in rat embryos. Triclopyr is also toxic to a range of wildlife, and its persistence can vary greatly depending on the application site, but some studies have shown it to persist longer than a year under certain conditions.

The field was sprayed earlier that morning, while classroom windows were open. It’s not clear from reports whether or not school was in session at the time of spray, but Jeff Galloway, director of Butler County Emergency Management Agency told the Dayton Daily News that they suspect that weather conditions, “heavy, humid air and a breeze,†pushed the chemical into the school.

School is a place where children need a healthy body and a clear head in order to learn. Numerous scientific studies find that pesticides typically used in schools are linked to chronic health effects such as cancer, asthma, neurological and immune system diseases, reproductive problems, and developmental and learning disabilities. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in schools has proven to be an effective and economical method of pest management that can prevent pest problems and, if carefully devined, eliminate the use of hazardous pesticides in school buildings and on school grounds.

Many communities across the country have taken a stand against the use of toxic pesticides on their lawns and landscapes. The state of New York passed the Child Safe Playing Fields Act which prohibits the use of toxic pesticides on school and daycare center playgrounds, turf, athletic and playing fields. Earlier this year, a bill to prohibit the use of most lawn pesticides on public and private playgrounds, recreation fields and daycare centers was introduced in New Jersey, The Child Safe Playing Field Act has passed the Senate Budget Committee, and is awaiting posting in the Senate. This bill will support the over 30 communities in New Jersey that have made their parks pesticide-free zones and have adopted an IPM program for managing town property by passing a resolution adopting a pesticide reduction policy. Connecticut and Illinois have also moved forward to reduce children’s exposures to lawn pesticides.

Exposure to toxic pesticides and other chemicals while children are at school is an unacceptable and completely unnecessary risk. This incident should not have happened and is a prime example for why it is time for a national policy that would prevent this from happening again and protect every child in the United States. Federal legislation, the School Environment Protection Act of 2009 (SEPA), was introduced by Rep. Rush Holt and would protect school children from pesticides used both indoors and on all school grounds nationwide. The legislation also bans the use of synthetic fertilizers. SEPA was first introduced in November 1999 in both the U.S. Senate and House; and has been reintroduced every Congressional session since. The bill language is based on state school pest management laws. It also mirrored the structure of the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, which established a national committee to oversee the program as well as established a list of pesticides allowed for use within the program. A form of SEPA has passed the U.S. Senate twice since and, together with other legislation, indicates broad support for a national mandate to stop hazardous pesticide use in schools. To learn more about this legislation and help its passage, see Beyond Pesticides’ SEPA webpage.

Sources: Dayton Daily News, Cincinnati.com

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share

26
Oct

New Report Highlights GMOs’ False Promises and Failed Technologies

(Beyond Pesticides, October 26, 2011) A new report highlights scientific research and empirical experiences around the globe that demonstrate the failure of genetically modified (GM) seeds and crops to deliver on their advertised promises to increase yields, reduce pesticide usage, and tolerate drought with “climate ready†traits.

A Global Citizens Report on the State of GMOs, “The GMO Emperor has no Clothes,†states that the on-the-ground experience in many countries discloses that GM technology has failed on all fronts, contrary to industry claims. The examples from around the globe include the financial burden borne by farmers. The report describes the cultivation of GM cotton in South Africa where the majority of farmers growing GM cotton are now in debt due to the high costs of seed, chemical, and other farm inputs. The Global Citizens Report confirms that such experiences are repeated in many countries and regions. The stories of Indian farmer indebtedness and increased suicides further emphasize the tragic costs of failed GM technology and its promises.

The prevalence of Roundup Ready GM crops has led to the increases of Roundup resistant weeds in the environment. Farmers and agronomists throughout the world are alarmed by the growing epidemic of “superweeds†developing a resistance to the herbicide. According to the report, from November 2007 to January 2011, infested acreage in the U.S. has more than quintupled, from 2.4 to 12.6 million acres. In Brazil, researchers have reported that nine species have developed tolerance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup. The recently released 2010 Agricultural Chemical Use Report by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) indicates that the use of glyphosate has dramatically increased over the last several years, while the use of other even more toxic chemicals, such as atrazine, has not declined. Contrary to common claims from chemical manufacturers and proponents of GM technology that the proliferation of herbicide tolerant GM crops would result in lower pesticide use rates, the data show that overall use of pesticides has remained relatively steady, while glyphosate use has skyrocketed to more than double the amount used just five years ago.

Glyphosate has been found to kill human embryonic cells, and can cause kidney and liver damage. Glyphosate is harmful to the environment, particularly aquatic life and water quality and has been linked to intersex frogs, and is lethal to amphibians in concentrations found in the environment. Recently, USDA scientists reported that glyphosate appears to be causing harmful changes in soil and potentially hindering yields of crops that farmers are cultivating.

There has long been a concern that GM crops would threaten and lead to the failure of organic farming systems as an alternative to highly toxic synthetic inputs. Organic farmers have expressed concern since the introduction of GMOs that the overuse of GM technology, which is inevitable when genetically engineered material is incorporated into every cell of a plant, will lead to insect resistance and leave many farmers without the important tool of organic agriculture. For more on genetically modified agriculture read Beyond Pesticides’ article “Ready or Not, Genetically Engineered Crops Explode on Market.â€

Similarly, insect species are also becoming resistant to the technology. Studies find rootworms are developing a resistance to GM corn in Iowa and Illinois. And, Monsanto, the undisputed leader in GM seed and crop technology and ownership, has, after several years, finally acknowledged that a bollworm pest has developed resistance to its bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) cotton.

Another common story detailed in the Global Citizens Report describes how GM technology is pushed by intensive lobbying and marketing efforts, “revolving door†influences, and funding of research and educational institutes. As noted in the report, the leading proponents of GM crops â€â€top food and agricultural biotechnology firmsâ€â€ spent more than $547 million lobbying the U.S. Congress between 1999 and 2009.

The report also documents increasing scientific evidence and warnings from scientists that GMOs may be harmful to human health, ecosystems and have failed to increase food production. It highlights that, in contrast to GM seeds and crops, agroecological farming systems, like organic farming systems, are proving to be the real answer to food insecurity. A recent study by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food reported that agroecological systems doubled crop yields over a period of three to 10 years in field tests conducted in 20 African countries. The report also cites numerous other studies confirming high yields and reduced chemical use in other regions of the world due to agroecological farming methods.

GMOs and the increased pesticide use that accompanies them have been the source of serious environmental contamination and public health concerns. Beyond Pesticides is currently involved in multiple lawsuits involving Roundup Ready and other GM crops. The first lawsuit is filed against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and seeks to end cultivation of GM crops on twenty-five national wildlife refuges across the U.S. Southeast. The suit is the latest step in a campaign to banish GM crops from all refuges. Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on August 12, 2011 by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), the Center for Food Safety (CFS), and Beyond Pesticides, the federal suit charges that FWS unlawfully entered into cooperative farming agreements and approved planting of GM crops in eight states without the environmental review required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and in violation of FWS policy. In another case involving GM crops, attorneys for CFS, Earthjustice, Beyond Pesticides, and others filed a lawsuit against USDA in March 2011, arguing that the agency’s unrestricted approval of GM “Roundup Ready†alfalfa violates the Endangered Species Act. USDA announced plans to fully deregulate GM alfalfa in January, despite contamination risks it poses to both organic and conventional farmers.

Beyond Pesticides believes that whether it is the incorporation into food crops of genes from a natural bacterium (Bt) or the development of a herbicide-resistant crop, the GM approach to agriculture and pest management is short sighted and dangerous. There are serious public health and pest resistance problems associated with GM crops. Beyond Pesticides’ goal is to push for labeling as a means of identifying products that contain GM ingredients, seek to educate on the public health and environmental consequences of this technology and generate support for sound ecological-based management systems.

For more news and information on “Roundup Ready†and other GE crops, see Beyond Pesticides’ genetic engineering page.

To learn more about alternatives to GM crops and chemical dependence, visit our organic food and farming page.

Source: Center for Food Safety

Share

25
Oct

California Farmers Plant Bee-Friendly Habitat to Bolster Populations

(Beyond Pesticides, October 25, 2011) Farmers in California and other states have begun planting bee-friendly flowers and shrubs to attract bees, whose populations have been severely declining in recent years under a complex set of circumstances. Farmers hope to sustain native bees and strengthen dwindling honey bee populations as well as lower their pollination costs. For many farmers that rely on bees to pollinate their crops, creating safe bee habitat and reducing chemical assaults can help stem the tide of declining pollinator populations.

These efforts, organized by the Xerces Society, a Portland, Ore.-based nonprofit group, and other organizations are aimed to educate and help farmers boost dwindling wild pollinator populations needs to pollinate their crops. According to Xerces Society, as part of their pollinator conservation program, farmers and land managers are trained with the latest science-based approaches to reversing the trend of pollinator declines. California farmers are provided seeds for native plants like wild rose, aster, sage, manzanita, and other shrubs and trees to entice bees. New bee habitat can also reduce a farmer’s costs and alleviate the stress on honey bees.

“For bees to thrive, they need a diverse diet, so we’re trying to bring more pollen diversity to farms, more plants to be part of the bees’ buffet,” said Mace Vaughan, Xerces Society’s pollinator program director. “This isn’t a panacea to pollination woes. This is part of the solution overall.”

The effort comes as honey bees, maintained by beekeepers, and native, or wild, bees are perishing in great numbers. Bees are essential pollinators of about one-third of the U.S. food supply, and they’re especially important in California, the nation’s top producer of fruits and vegetables. This makes the pollinator problem dire in this state, where large farms often grow single crops that rely on pollination and don’t offer bees a varied diet.

The die-off is blamed on colony collapse disorder (CCD), in which all the adult honey bees in a colony suddenly die. The disorder has destroyed honey bee colonies at a rate of about 30 percent per year since it was recognized in 2006, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Before that, about 15 percent of colonies died per year from a variety of pests and diseases. Researchers aren’t sure what causes the disorder, but they suspect a combination of stressors, including pesticides, mites and parasites, and lack of proper nutrition.

The California State Beekeepers Association is also helping farmers to improve habitat. Run by Project Apis m., which funds and directs research to improve the health of honeybees, the program has enlisted growers to dedicate acreage to bees and is identifying which seed mixtures make for best bee forage on farms and in orchards. According to project Aphis m., emphasis is placed on research studies that have realistic and practical usefulness for beekeeping businesses.

“We want to make sure bees don’t starve to death before and after almond pollination,” said Christi Heintz, executive director of Project Apis m. The goal, Ms. Heintz said, is to make it economically viable for farmers to plant bee habitat. One option, Ms. Heintz said, is to plant a bee-friendly crop that can be used as biofuel, such as canola and camelina. Another is partnering with the cosmetics industry, growing oil seed plants such as cuphea and echium that are used in creams.

The decline of wild pollinators received increased attention in the late 1990’s when researchers identified the need for action to understand and protect them, though others warned of the threat earlier. Wild pollinators, which include non-Apis species of bees, wasps, beetles, flies, butterflies, moths, birds, bats, and even some non-flying mammals, have suffered “multiple anthropogenic insults†in the last several decades. These include habitat destruction and fragmentation, pesticide use, land management practices and the introduction of non-native species and pathogens, all of which collectively threaten their existence. Read Beyond Pesticides’ factsheet: “Backyard Beekeeping†on what you can do to boost pollinator populations.

The loss of pollinators appears to have multiple interacting causes including pathogens, a range of evidence points to sub-lethal pesticide exposures as important contributing factors. Neonicotinoid pesticides, like clothianidin and imidacloprid, are a particularly suspect class of systemic insecticides, especially in combination with the dozens of other pesticides found in honeybee hives. Read more about imidacloprid and the controversial regulation of clothianidin in “Protecting Pollinators: Stopping the Demise of Bees.†The use of chemicals in agriculture has been found to damage bees by weakening their immune systems. Laboratory studies show that some insecticides and fungicides can act together to be 1,000 times more toxic to bees. They can also affect the sense of direction, memory and brain metabolism, and herbicides and pesticides may reduce the availability of plants bees need for food and for the larval stages of some pollinators.

Solutions to the loss of bees and other pollinators are clearly within our reach if we engage our communities and governmental bodies. Beyond Pesticides is embarking on a campaign to protect pollinators from unnecessary toxic chemical exposure by reframing how we approach policies that allow the continued use of unnecessary chemicals for which there are safe alternatives. For more information, visit our Pollinators and Pesticides program page.

Please join Beyond Pesticides in celebrating our 30th Anniversary at a reception with live music and screening of “Vanishing of the Bees†on Thursday, October 27, 2011 in Washington, DC. Featured beekeeper David Hackenberg, who first discovered colony collapse disorder (CCD), will be with us to introduce the film. RSVP today.

Source: Star Tribune

All unattributed positions and opinions in this piece are those of Beyond Pesticides.

Share
  • Archives

  • Categories

    • air pollution (8)
    • Announcements (605)
    • Antibiotic Resistance (41)
    • Antimicrobial (18)
    • Aquaculture (30)
    • Aquatic Organisms (37)
    • Bats (7)
    • Beneficials (52)
    • Biofuels (6)
    • Biological Control (34)
    • Biomonitoring (40)
    • Birds (26)
    • btomsfiolone (1)
    • Bug Bombs (2)
    • Cannabis (30)
    • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (10)
    • Chemical Mixtures (8)
    • Children (113)
    • Children/Schools (240)
    • cicadas (1)
    • Climate (31)
    • Climate Change (86)
    • Clover (1)
    • compost (6)
    • Congress (21)
    • contamination (157)
    • deethylatrazine (1)
    • diamides (1)
    • Disinfectants & Sanitizers (19)
    • Drift (17)
    • Drinking Water (16)
    • Ecosystem Services (16)
    • Emergency Exemption (3)
    • Environmental Justice (167)
    • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (538)
    • Events (89)
    • Farm Bill (24)
    • Farmworkers (198)
    • Forestry (5)
    • Fracking (4)
    • Fungal Resistance (6)
    • Fungicides (26)
    • Goats (2)
    • Golf (15)
    • Greenhouse (1)
    • Groundwater (16)
    • Health care (32)
    • Herbicides (43)
    • Holidays (39)
    • Household Use (9)
    • Indigenous People (6)
    • Indoor Air Quality (6)
    • Infectious Disease (4)
    • Integrated and Organic Pest Management (71)
    • Invasive Species (35)
    • Label Claims (50)
    • Lawns/Landscapes (251)
    • Litigation (345)
    • Livestock (9)
    • men’s health (4)
    • metabolic syndrome (3)
    • Metabolites (4)
    • Microbiata (23)
    • Microbiome (28)
    • molluscicide (1)
    • Nanosilver (2)
    • Nanotechnology (54)
    • National Politics (388)
    • Native Americans (3)
    • Occupational Health (16)
    • Oceans (11)
    • Office of Inspector General (4)
    • perennial crops (1)
    • Pesticide Drift (163)
    • Pesticide Efficacy (11)
    • Pesticide Mixtures (14)
    • Pesticide Regulation (784)
    • Pesticide Residues (185)
    • Pets (36)
    • Plant Incorporated Protectants (2)
    • Plastic (9)
    • Poisoning (20)
    • Preemption (45)
    • President-elect Transition (2)
    • Reflection (1)
    • Repellent (4)
    • Resistance (120)
    • Rights-of-Way (1)
    • Rodenticide (33)
    • Seasonal (3)
    • Seeds (6)
    • soil health (18)
    • Superfund (5)
    • synergistic effects (24)
    • Synthetic Pyrethroids (16)
    • Synthetic Turf (3)
    • Take Action (596)
    • Textile/Apparel/Fashion Industry (1)
    • Toxic Waste (12)
    • U.S. Supreme Court (2)
    • Volatile Organic Compounds (1)
    • Women’s Health (26)
    • Wood Preservatives (36)
    • World Health Organization (11)
    • Year in Review (2)
  • Most Viewed Posts