The campaign also recently launched a new infographic, (pictured to the right) which visually explains why FDA should Just Label It. It is designed to clearly show the need for labeling of GE foods, and is convenient for sharing on-line and via social media.

Meanwhile, on the West coast, The California Right to Know Initiative Campaign is also gaining momentum with its signature gathering efforts across the state to place a voter backed initiative on the November 2012 ballot that would mandate labeling of genetically engineered food. The effort is supported by a broad coalition of public health, family, environmental organizations, farmers and individuals. So far, thousands of energized volunteers have been collecting signatures to qualify the petition for the ballot since mid-February across the state.

The Congressional letter to FDA states:

“At issue is the fundamental right consumers have to make informed choices about the food they eat”¦The agency currently requires over 3,000 other ingredients, additives, and processes to be labeled; providing basic information doesn’t confuse the public, it empowers them to make choices. Absent labeling, Americans are unable to choose for themselves whether to purchase GE foods”¦. We urge you to fully review the facts, law, and science, and side with the American public by requiring the labeling of genetically engineered foods as is done in nearly 50 countries throughout the world.”

In the U.S. there is overwhelming public demand ””consistently near 95%”” for the labeling of GE foods. The U.S. policy of not requiring GE labeling makes it a stark outlier among developed and developing nations. Nearly 50 countries have mandatory labeling policies for GE foods including South Korea, Japan, the United Kingdom, Brazil, China, Australia, New Zealand, the entire European Union, and many others.

In its 1992 policy statement, FDA allowed GE foods to be marketed without labeling on the basis that they were not “materially” different from other foods. However, the agency severely limited what it considered “material” by targeting only changes in food that could be recognized by taste, smell, or other senses —applying 19th century science to the regulation of 21st century food technologies. The outdated standard has no legal basis in the statute and was adopted by FDA despite a lack of scientific studies or data to support the assumption that GE foods are not materially different from conventional foods.

The 45 Members of the U.S. House of Representatives to join the Congressional letter are: Peter DeFazio (OR-4), Richard Hanna (NY-24), Dennis Kucinich (OH-10), George Miller, (CA-7), Louise Slaughter(NY-28), Keith Ellison (MN-5), Raul Grijalva (AZ-7), Peter Welch (VT-At Large), Hansen Clarke (MI-13), Earl Blumenauer, (OR-3), Lloyd Doggett (TX-25), Anna Eshoo (CA-14), Sam Farr (CA-17), Maurice Hinchey (NY-22), Rush Holt (NJ-12), Chellie Pingree (ME-1), Jim McDermott WA-7), Madeleine Bordallo (GU-At Large), James Moran (VA-8), John Olver (MA-1), Jared Polis (CO-2), Charles Rangel (NY-15), Suzanne Bonamici (OR-1), Pete Stark (CA-13), Howard L. Berman (CA-28), Robert Brady (PA-1), David Cicilline (RI-1), Yvette D. Clarke (NY-11), Steve Cohen (TN-9), Dianne DeGette (CO-1), Bob Filner (CA-5), Barney Frank (MA-4), Luis Gutierrez (IL-4), Janice Hahn (CA-36), Michael Honda (CA-15), Barbara Lee (CA-9), Zoe Lofgren (CA-16), James McGovern (MA-3), Jan Schakowsky (IL-9), Jackie Speier (CA-12), John Tierney (MA-6), Melvin L. Watt (NC-12), Lynn Woolsey (CA-6), Maxine Waters (CA-35), and Grace Napolitano (CA-38).

The 10 Members of the U.S. Senate to join the letter are: Barbara Boxer (CA), Patrick Leahy (VT), Bernie Sanders (VT), Daniel Akaka (HI), Dianne Feinstein (CA), Ron Wyden (OR), Mark Begich (AK), Jon Tester (MT), Richard Blumenthal (CT), and Jeff Merkley (OR).

The letter was supported by more than 70 businesses and organizations including Stonyfield Farm, the National Cooperative Grocers Association, the National Organic Coalition, Beanitos, Inc., Consumers Union, Organic Valley, PCC Natural Markets, the Organic Farming Research Foundation, and a number of farming and fishing associations.

Beyond Pesticides’ goal is to push for labeling as a means of identifying products containing GE ingredients and allow for consumer choice that will drive the market toward sustainable practices. The European Union, Japan, Australia, Brazil, Russia, and China require labeling for GE foods. Recently, the German corporation BASF announced that it would stop developing genetically engineered products targeting the European market, in part due to low consumer demand. Given that about 95% of Americans support mandatory labeling of GE foods, Beyond Pesticides believes that we can have the same impact in the U.S. as in Europe.

The best way to avoid genetically engineered foods in the marketplace is by purchasing foods that have the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Certified Organic Seal. Under organic certification standards, genetically modified organisms and their byproducts are prohibited. For many other reasons, organic products are the right choice for consumers; however, the current lax regulations on GE crops in the U.S. present a unique risk to organic growers. Wind-pollinated and bee-pollinated crops, such as corn and alfalfa, have high risks of cross pollination between GE crops and unmodified varieties. For more information on genetically engineered food, please see Beyond Pesticides’ Genetic Engineering program page.

Take Action

In California: In order to get The Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act on the ballot in California in 2012, organizers need to collect signatures from 800,000 California voters. Sign up to get involved in our signature gathering efforts and learn more about the campaign at www.carighttoknow.org.

Nationally: Help the Just Label It Campaign exceed its 1,000,000 signature goal by March 27th. Sign the Just Label It petition and submit your comments to FDA at www.justlabelit.org/takeaction.

You can also help by sharing the infographic pictured above, or share the petition with your social networks via Facebook or Twitter.

Sources: Center for Food Safety Press Release, Just Label It!, and California Right to Know

According to the report, Addressing Nitrate in California’s Drinking Water, nitrate runoff from agricultural regions is one of the state’s most widespread groundwater contaminants. Nearly 10 percent of the 2.6 million people living in the Tulare Lake Basin and Salinas Valley might be drinking nitrate-contaminated water, the report found. If nothing is done to stem the problem, the report warns, those at risk for health and financial problems may number nearly 80 percent by 2050.

The report is the most comprehensive assessment so far of nitrate contamination in California’s agricultural areas. The study area includes four of the nation’s five counties with the largest agricultural production. It represents about 40% of California’s irrigated cropland (including 80 different crops) and over half of California’s dairy herd. Many communities in the area are among the poorest in California and have limited economic means or technical capacity to maintain safe drinking water, given threats from nitrate and other contaminants. California’s governments, communities, and agricultural industry have struggled over nitrate contamination for decades. High nitrate levels in drinking water are known to cause skin rashes, hair loss, birth defects, and “blue baby syndrome,” a potentially fatal blood disorder in infants. A recent National Institutes of Health study links increased risk of thyroid cancer with high nitrate levels in public water supplies.

Nitrate-contaminated water is well-documented in many of California’s farming communities. The agricultural industry, however, has maintained that it is not solely responsible because nitrates come from many sources. According to the UC Davis report, 96 percent of nitrate contamination comes from agriculture, while only 4 percent can be traced to water treatment plants, septic systems, food processing, landscaping, and other sources. In order to reduce this pollution, the report recommends managing nitrogen fertilizer and manure to increase crop nitrogen use efficiency, managing crop plants to capture more nitrogen and decrease deep percolation, as well as improving the storage and handling of fertilizers and manure to decrease off-target discharge.

Similarly, pesticide use in California rose in 2010 after declining for four consecutive years, according to data from the Department of Pesticide Regulation. More than 173 million pounds of pesticides were reported applied statewide, an increase of nearly 15 million pounds — or 9.5 percent — from 2009. Overall, most of the growth in pesticide use was in production agriculture, where applications increased by 12 million pounds. Fertilizer and pesticides use therefore contribute to the growing environmental contamination of California’s surface and ground waters, as well as other environmental components.

Nitrates are odorless, tasteless compounds that form when nitrogen from ammonia and other sources mix with water. While nitrogen and nitrates occur naturally, the advent of synthetic fertilizer has coincided with a dramatic increase in nitrates in drinking water. Rural residents are at greater risk because they depend on private wells, which are often shallower and not monitored to the same degree as public water sources. Current contamination likely came from nitrates introduced into the soil decades ago. That means even if nitrates were dramatically reduced today, groundwater would still suffer for decades to come.

At the other side of the country, in Maryland, state law requires cities and farms to keep a close eye on nutrient runoff in the Chesapeake Bay. Pollution in the Chesapeake Bay, which supports over 3,600 species of plants, fish, and other animals, increases when nitrates and phosphorous from fertilizer wash into its waters from snow and rainfall. Reports studying the Bay have also found that nitrogen and phosphorus loads, along with pesticide pollution from farm fields and households, contribute to the Chesapeake Bay’s decline. Last year, the Maryland House of Delegates passed the Fertilizer Use Act of 2011 (HB 573) to limit fertilizer use on lawns.

Take Action: Want to do your own part to help reduce the release of dangerous and damaging chemicals in our homes, farms, and environment? Support organic agriculture and institutional IPM programs at schools and hospitals! You can even go organic in your own home, lawn, and garden. There are alternatives to toxic pesticides available for a wide range of pests whether in agriculture, or throughout the urban environment including structural and landscape pest problems.

To learn even more, attend our Healthy Communities Conference, March 30-31 in New Haven, CT. Join researchers, authors, organic business leaders, elected officials, activists, and others to discuss the latest pesticide science, policy solutions, and grassroots action. For more information, including a full speaker list and schedule of events, please see the Forum webpage.

Data submitted as part of the registration process also indicates that the biopesticide is less toxic to humans and many non-target organisms than other products currently use to prevent the transmission of Lyme disease. These pesticides include DEET applied as a topical repellent and synthetic pyrethroids including permethrin and bifenthrin which are sprayed in outdoor settings to kill disease-bearing ticks. For years scientists have raised concerns about the use of DEET and seizures among children, even though the EPA says that there is not enough information to implicate DEET with these incidents. DEET is quickly absorbed through the skin and has caused adverse effects including severe skin reactions such as large blisters and burning sensations. Use of DEET by pregnant woman has been linked to birth defects, and laboratory studies have found that DEET can cause neurological damage, including brain damage in children. EPA classifies permethrin as a possible human carcinogen, based on evidence of lung tumors in lab animals exposed to the chemical and also lists it as a suspected endocrine disruptor. In addition to these human health effects, pyrethroids are persistent in the environment and adversely impact non-target organisms.

Entomopathogenic fungi such as Metarhizium anisopliae are promising alternatives to these chemical insecticides because they are generally recognized as less toxic to humans, wild mammals, avian species, and terrestrial and aquatic plants. However, a major hurdle concerning the registration of these fungi as biopesticides has been their potential pathogenicity to a wide variety of insects, including beneficial organisms. The challenge in developing effective materials has been to identify and isolate the compounds that are selectively toxic to the target organism. Studies accompanying the registration review indicate that the biopesticide containing Metarhizium anisopliae posed no hazard to lady beetles, green lacewings, parasitic wasps, honey bee larvae, honey bee adults, and earthworms. However, much of the research supporting these conclusions is derived from laboratory studies and close scrutiny of the material’s performance in the field will be essential for drawing more definite conclusions.

According to Kirby Stafford III, Ph.D., Vice Director of the Experiment Station and the Connecticut State Entomologist, the Danish firm Novozymes is preparing to market a preparation of the Metarhizium anisopliae biopesticide for blacklegged tick control in 2014. The company is conducting additional research in 2013 using registered pesticide applicators to further evaluate the material’s performance in the field. Products containing the biopesticide’s active ingredient are already registered for use on nursery and ornamental crops.

Lyme disease is the most prevalent tick-borne disease in the United States with approximately 30,000 confirmed and probable cases reported in 2010. It is caused by the bacterium Borrelia Burgdorferi that is harbored by several species of ticks, but most significantly the blacklegged tick that is ubiquitous in the northeastern and north central United States. Ticks tend to live on smaller hosts, including mice, rodents, and birds during their nymph and larval stages before feeding on deer or humans as adults, when they can pass on the bacteria.

Symptoms of Lyme disease can vary from person to person, but in most cases a bump that looks like a bulls-eye aong with a possible rash at the site of the bite or elsewhere on the body. The bump will be red on light skin and look like a bruise on dark skin, and will usually occur within 30 days of a bite. In that time, the person may also develop flu-like symptoms: fatigue, chills, headache, muscle and joint aches, and a low fever. In about 25% of cases no rash or bump will develop at all. Anyone bitten by a tick in an area with a high rate of Lyme disease should contact their doctor immediately.

For more information on non-toxic tick control, see our Fact Sheet.

Source: Connecticut Post

Conference Highlights:

Pesticide-Free Lawns and Landscapes
With the Connecticut General Assembly’s considering legislation that would repeal the state’s ban on toxic pesticide use on school grounds by replacing it with a weak “integrated pest management” (IPM) system, this issue will be a central theme at the conference. Speakers on this topic include: Warren Porter, PhD, professor of Zoology and Environmental Toxicology at the University of Wisconsin at Madison with expertise in lawn chemicals, especially low doses and mixtures; Chip Osborne, national organic turf expert and president of Osborne Organics; Patti Wood, executive director of Grassroots Environmental Education, a key player in the state pesticide bans; Paul Tukey, founder and spokesman for the Safe Lawns Foundation and author of The Organic Lawn Care Manual; Sarah Little, PhD, author of Introduction to Organic Lawns and Yards and editor of the NOFA Standards For Organic Land Care.

Pesticides and Health
Research continues to link pesticide exposure to health effects like ADHD, cancer, hormone disruption and more. Nationally renowned scientists will present their work and perspectives on the pesticide problem. Speakers include: Sandra Steingraber, PhD, ecologist and author of several books including Living Downstream and Raising Elijah; John Wargo, PhD, Yale professor and author of Our Children’s Toxic Legacy and Green Intelligence; Routt Reigart, MD, Medical University of South Carolina professor and the nation’s top pediatric expert on pesticides; Julia Brody, PhD, breast cancer researcher and director of the Silent Spring Institute; Allison Aiello, PhD, University of Michigan School of Public Health epidemiologist with expertise in antibacterial and infectious disease.

Honey Bee Protection
Considering that honey bees pollinate one-third of the food we eat, the decline in honey bee populations, which has been linked in part to pesticides, must be a national priority. The Forum will feature beekeepers and a groundbreaking university researcher. David Hackenberg, beekeeper to first discover Colony Collapse Disorder; Christian Krupke, PhD, Purdue entomologist who discovered EPA was severely underestimating honey bee exposure to pesticides; Robert Deschak, core member of the New York City Beekeepers Association who keeps hives on NYC rooftops; Ted and Becky Jones, owners of Jones’ Apiaries, and president and treasurer of the Connecticut Beekeepers’ Association, who will be bringing a demonstration hive to the conference.

Healthy Food: Fair, Local and Organic
Pesticides not only affect the people who consume food, but also those who grow it and live near agricultural areas. The conference will begin with a tour of local urban farms (and pesticide-free playing fields), and feature organics as a theme throughout. Gary Hirshberg, chairman and co-founder of Stonyfield Farms and anti-GMO advocate; Nelson Carrasquillo, general coordinator CATA (Farmworkers Support Committee); Bill Duesing, executive director of the Northeast Farming Association of Connecticut (CT NOFA); Martha Page, executive director of Hartford Food System, a nonprofit organization in Hartford devoted to issues of food security.

MSU scientist Barry Jacobsen, Ph.D. first discovered the bacterium in 1994 when a field of sugar beet crops in Sidney, MT had been devastated and nearly wiped out due to the Cercospora leaf spot. Area farmers were spending millions of dollars on aerial applications of fungicides to fight the disease, but were losing the battle due to resistance. Dr. Jacobsen and his team of researchers looked to the few surviving plants to find out what enabled them to ward off the fungal disease.

The researchers isolated over 300 bacteria found on the healthy leaves, and found that one- Bacillus mycoides isolate J- had the ability to fight the Cercospora leaf spot. It works by turning on one particular gene, the NPR1 gene, which is found in most plants and most food crops except for peanuts. When this gene is turned on, it triggers the plant’s immune response, setting in motion a whole range of defenses for the plant.

“Within five minutes of that bacillus spore being on the plant leaf, the plant knows it’s there and it starts its defense reactions,” said Dr. Jacobsen. “It reacts by producing hydrogen peroxide and some other things and this thickens cell walls and makes it more difficult for a pathogen to infect. Within a day it starts to produce enzymes that attack fungi and bacteria. And it’s very effective on viruses as well, but so far we don’t understand how that happens.”

Researchers aren’t certain how exactly the immune response is triggered. However, BmJ need only be sprinkled on any location of the plant for the NPR1 gene to activate throughout the entire plant.

Dr. Jacobson believes that BmJ should provide stable and predictable protection to farmers when it is used in an integrated approach with other disease-fighting measures. Ultimately, he says it could reduce the use of toxic fungicides and pesticides. Because it is naturally occurring and has not been genetically modified, Dr. Jacobsen also says, “it should be labeled as available for organic gardeners.”

MSU has patented all methods for inducing SAR in plants through BmJ-based control agents; related patents are pending. The technology has been under development by MSU and Montana BioAgriculture, and the collaboration has proven the efficacy of BmJ against Cercospora leaf spot in sugar beets, white mold and early blight in potatoes, and several other crop diseases. Certis USA plans to commercialize this technology worldwide in an expanded range of crops and diseases.

According to the study, Neuropsychological Measures of Attention and Impulse Control among 8-Year-Old Children Exposed Prenatally to Organochlorines, boys who were exposed to higher levels of the organochlorines -polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and DDE (a metabolite of DDT)- in the womb scored lower on focus and concentration tests, which indicates they are more likely to have attention problems often related to ADHD.

In the study, umbilical cord blood was collected from 788 newborns born between 1993 and 1998 from four towns near New Bedford Harbor, Mass., to see what they were exposed to in the womb. Roughly eight years after they were born, almost 600 of these children underwent two tests. One measured their ability to focus on and react to a specific target —in this case, the image of a cat on a computer screen- and to inhibit their response to another animal’s image. The other exam included parts of an IQ test that measured their processing speed and distractability, which tests whether they can maintain attention over time. Boys exposed to the highest levels of PCBs during their mother’s pregnancy failed to press a button for the on-screen cat 12 percent more often than children exposed to the lowest levels. Those same boys also scored slightly lower in the other test. The same link was not found in girls. Animal data suggest that hormone-disrupting chemicals, including PCBs, affect each gender differently, but the connection in humans remains unclear.

All of the children studied were born to mothers who lived near the contaminated harbor and dumpsites in low-income communities, where twice as many people live below the poverty line than the Massachusetts average. Unfortunately, children from low-income families are typically exposed to higher levels of environmental chemicals —some currently used and some long banned— than U.S. children from other socioeconomic backgrounds. The exposures in this New Bedford study were fairly low (median: 0.19ng/n PCB; 0.31ng/g DDE), which is comparable to children’s levels throughout much of the U.S. This means that a connection between PCBs and attention problems in boys could exist in other communities as well. Boys are two to three times as likely as girls to develop ADHD, the most common learning disorder reported in children worldwide. In 2007, U.S. parents reported that nearly 10 percent of children between the ages of 4 and 17 had been diagnosed with ADHD, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Banned in the U.S. more than 30 years ago, PCBs belong to the same class of chemicals as other notorious persistent pollutants, including DDT and chlordane. These chemicals persist in the environment for extraordinarily long periods of time and even accumulate in food chains. Nearly every U.S. resident still has detectable levels of an organochlorine chemicals in his or her blood. PCBs and its chemical cousins have the ability to disrupt hormones, which can alter how the brain develops. One study found a link between organochlorines and non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma.

Organochlorines 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 are often long-term and multigenerational, with pesticides no longer in use continuing to affect public health. This also 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.

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.

The 2012 HHS EJ Strategy was developed as part of the Department’s reaffirmation of its commitment to environmental justice. HHS defines environmental justice (EJ) as “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.” In August 2011, HHS joined 16 other Federal agencies in signing the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Environmental Justice and Executive Order 12898 which calls for each agency to develop an environmental justice strategy and prepare annual implementation progress reports. HHS published a draft EJ Strategy in October 2011 for public comment. The final 2012 HHS EJ Strategy reflects comments received during the public comment process, as well as comments and concerns expressed in seventeen stakeholder engagements between November 2010 and November 2011.

There are four strategic elements outlined in the strategy: (1) Policy Development and Dissemination, (2) Education and Training, (3) Research and Data Collection, Analysis, and Utilization, and (4) Services. The 2012 HHS EJ Strategy reflects new and ongoing actions that are underway or planned for the near term. The Strategy provides direction for the agency’s efforts to achieve environmental justice as part of its mission by both identifying and addressing disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects on low-income populations and Indian Tribes, and encouraging the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of affected parties with the goal of building healthy, resilient communities and reducing disparities in health and well-being associated with environmental factors.

Within the current landscape of health hazards associated with environmental justice, HHS recognizes that race and poverty continue to be critical determinants of disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards. The prevalence of asthma, for instance, is highest among multi-racial Americans, Hispanics of Puerto Rican descent and non-Hispanic blacks, and is also higher among those living in poverty. Furthermore, the HHS also finds that inadequate and unhealthy housing contributes to infectious and chronic diseases, injuries, and adverse childhood developmental outcomes. Non-Hispanic blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians/Alaska Natives are at least twice as likely to live in inadequate housing as non-Hispanic whites.

HHS also finds that agricultural workers and communities near chemical-intensive industrial farming have unique health issues. Emissions and chemicals used in industrial agriculture are disproportionately located in minority and low-income communities of rural areas. Licensed pesticide applicators are more likely to suffer adverse neurological effects from increased exposure to pesticides in their workplace.

The 2012 HHS EJ Strategy seeks to address these disparities with each of the strategic elements set forth in the plan and to ensure that everyone has access to a clean, safe and healthy environment. Beyond Pesticides encourages individuals to start at home and by decreasing the demand for harmful pesticides and toxic chemicals. Learn more about how to get pesticides out of your home, community, and food at our Safer Choice webpage, and share the link with your friends, family, and neighbors. For more information on how our food system affects farmworkers and rural families around the world, as well as the environment, see our Eating with a Conscience webpage.

Beyond Pesticides Executive Director Jay Feldman joined the numerous witnesses at a hearing on February 27 in, presenting testimony in support of the basic tenets of the Act and proposing recommendations to strengthen it. The legislation is opposed by pesticide industry groups that testified at the hearing, including the National Pest Management Association and Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment (RISE), trade groups that have consistently opposed local and state legislation across the country to ban or tighten restrictions on pesticides and implement nontoxic management practices.

As currently drafted, the Act authorizes the District’s Department of the Environment (DDOE) to designate pesticides registered in the District as either restricted use or minimum risk based on toxicity toward human and environmental health. The Act further requires DDOE to weigh the necessity for a pesticide’s use against the availability of effective and economical alternatives when making this designation. Under federal law, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is prohibited from considering a pesticide’s necessity as part of its registration review. The Act prohibits the use of pesticides designated as restricted use unless DDOE granted an exemption in the event of an emergency pest outbreak posing an imminent threat to public health or when significant economic damage would result from not using the pesticide. Individuals or entities including pest management companies seeking an exemption to use a restricted use pesticide would be required to make a good-faith effort to find alternatives; clearly demonstrates that effective, economical alternatives to the prohibited pesticide are unavailable and demonstrate a reasonable plan for investigating alternatives during the exemption period.

The strengths of the current proposal are also the areas where more precise language is needed to ensure that the new standard is fully protective. The Act should clearly identify the human health hazards that are viewed as unacceptable and unnecessary in pest management systems in the District and direct DDOE to examine the full spectrum of adverse outcomes associated with each pesticide it registers. The risk management approach used by EPA to register pesticides has failed to adequately protect the public health and the environment. The approach is especially insensitive to the most vulnerable, including children and the elderly, and those who have existing illnesses associated with cancer, respiratory problems, immune and nervous system and other medical conditions cited above. Beyond Pesticides maintains a database of epidemiologic and laboratory studies based on real world exposure scenarios that link public health effects to pesticides. Additionally, the registrants should assume the burden of proving that their products can meet the public health standard going forward. In this context, no chemical should be introduced into a pest management system without a showing that it is necessary after all cultural, mechanical, and biological approaches have been implemented.

The Act would further benefit from an enhanced definition of integrated pest management prioritizing non-chemical practices that prevent pests from entering a site or becoming established. There should be no allowance for any pesticides or synthetic fertilizer ingredients in lawn and landscape maintenance since organic practices are capable of providing outstanding results. Organic practices eliminate chemicals, incorporate compost fertilizers and mulching systems, and focus on managing weeds and insects through the development of healthier plants and turf that are not vulnerable to disease and infestation. Additionally, public health emergencies should be the only acceptable basis for an exemption allowing a restricted use pesticide. Beyond Pesticides supports the proposed increase in the District’s pesticide registration fees with the proceeds being used to fund the DDOE’s enforcement capacity and the public education campaign.

Chairwoman Cheh was a strong supporter of the Loretta Carter Hanes Pesticide Consumer Notification Act of 2008 which was the first revision of the District’s pesticide registration regulations since their passage in 1977. The bill was named in honor of Loretta Carter Hanes, a DC resident whose family suffered severe physical impairment and financial distress in the aftermath of a disastrous application of permethrin to their home to control termites. The Act requires pesticide applicators to provide information to citizens about the pesticides that are applied in and around their homes, encourage the use of reduced risk pesticides and methods of pest control and notify citizens of outdoor pesticide applications.

DDOE Director Christophe Tulou also testified at the hearing and expressed full confidence in the Department’s capacity to meet its obligations as specified in the Act. He acknowledged that the information that EPA currently provides has not been sufficient for DDOE’s needs. Chairwoman Cheh expressed her commitment to reviewing the day’s testimony with an eye towards amending the current proposal before she closed the hearing.

A video broadcast of the entire hearing is available to watch here. Highlights include testimony and responses to follow up questions from panels of witnesses beginning with Dr. Jennifer Sass of the Natural Resources Defense Council, Dr. Jerome Paulson of the Child Health Advocacy Institute and Professor of Pediatrics at the George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences and Paul Tuchy of Safelawns.org (begins at 19:30); Jay Feldman of Beyond Pesticides, Alan Cohen of Bio-Logical Pest Management and Chris Weiss of the DC Environmental Network (begins at 1:20:00); Dr. Alan Vinitsky, a Board certified internist and pediatrician (begins at 2:15:00); and Dr. Richard Kramer, a pesticide applicator and business owner speaking on behalf of the National Pest Management Association, Burt Dotson, Jr., also a pesticide applicator and business owner and Kate Schenck representing Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment (begins at 2:45:00); and DDOE Director Christophe Tulou (begins at 3:52:00).

Source: Public Hearing of the Environment, Transportation and Public Works Committee of the Council of the District of Columbia.