The findings of the report support a comprehensive United Nations’ assessment of world agriculture in the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), which in 2008 concluded that GM crops have little potential to alleviate poverty and hunger in the world. IAASTD experts recommended instead low-cost, low-input agroecological farming methods.

“U.S. farmers are facing dramatic increases in the price of GM seeds and the chemicals used with them,” said Bill Freese, science policy analyst at the US-based Center for Food Safety and co-author of the report. “Farmers in any developing country that welcomes Monsanto and other biotech companies can expect the same fate – sharply rising seed and pesticide costs, and a radical decline in the availability of conventional seeds.”

According to the report, GM seeds cost from two to over four times as much as conventional, non-GM seeds, and the price disparity is increasing. From 80% to over 90% of the soybean, corn and cotton seeds planted in the U.S. are GM varieties. Thanks to GM trait fee increases, average U.S. seed prices for these crops have risen by over 50% in just the past two to three years. Exploitation of the food crisis has been extremely profitable for Monsanto, by far the dominant player in GM seeds. Goldman Sachs recently projected that Monsanto’s net income (after taxes) would triple from $984 million to $2.96 billion from 2007 to 2010.

The exorbitant cost of GM seeds is not the only problem. The vast majority of GM crops are not grown by or destined for the world’s poor, but instead are soybeans and corn used to feed animals, generate biofuels, or produce highly processed food products consumed mostly in rich countries. The report documents that nearly 90% of the global area planted GM crops in 2008 was found in just 6 countries with highly industrialized, export-oriented agricultural sectors in North and South America, with the U.S., Argentina and Brazil responsible for 80% of GM crops. The United States alone produced 50% of the world’s GM crops in 2008.

Despite more than a decade of hype, the biotechnology industry has not introduced a single GM crop with increased yield, enhanced nutrition, drought-tolerance or salt-tolerance. In fact, the biotechnology industry’s own figures show that 85% of all GM crop acreage worldwide in 2008 was planted with herbicide-tolerant crops. Herbicide-tolerant GM crops – chiefly Monsanto’s Roundup Ready varieties used with Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide (active ingredient glyphosate), have increased overall use of chemical weed killers. Roundup prices in the U.S. have more than doubled in the past two years.

Meanwhile, biotech propaganda has obscured the huge potential of low-cost agroecological and organic techniques to increase food production and alleviate hunger in developing countries. The report mentions several such projects, such as push-pull maize farming, practiced by 10,000 farmers in east Africa. The enormously successful push-pull system controls weed and insect pests without chemicals, increases maize production, and raises the income of smallholder farmers.

“GM seeds and the pesticides used with them are much too expensive for Africa’s small farmers,” said Nnimmo Bassey, executive director of Friends of the Earth Nigeria and chair of Friends of the Earth International. “Those who promote this technology in developing countries are completely out of touch with reality.”

TAKE ACTION: Currently the U.S. Department of Agriculture is accepting comments until March 17, 2009 on new rules on GM and pharmaceutical crops that would significantly weaken oversight of all GM crops, and which continue to allow companies to grow feed crops engineered to produce drugs and industrial chemicals, according to the Center for Food Safety. For more information on these proposed rules and to sign a petition for stronger regulations, click here.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is also accepting comments on GM crops. Comments are being accepting until March 6, 2009 on Monsanto’s second application to extend its experimental use permit for GM soybeans engineered with the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt).

The huge die-off of lobsters began in 1999, days after towns in Fairfield County, Westchester County and Long Island, as well as New York City, sprayed malathion to kill mosquitoes carrying the West Nile virus. Also at that time, remnants of hurricane Floyd drenched the state and washed the pesticide into Long Island Sound. The DEP, however, says the storm caused many other factors that led to the mass die-off. However, the lobster population has yet to recover. State lawmakers find DEP’s position on malathion puzzling. Rep. Richard Roy (D-Milford), chair of the House Environment Committee, and Senate Assistant Majority Leader Bob Duff (D-Norwal) are questioning DEP about its efforts to restore the state’s lobster industry while ignoring industry experts on the effects of pesticides lobstermen say continue to kill the animals. To date, Connecticut has spent $1 million trying to restore the lobster fishery and could spend another $200,000 on the program.

“They’re trying to restore an industry, but they don’t listen to the industry about potential problems with pesticides. That’s odd,” Rep. Roy said. “It doesn’t make much sense to work to restore the lobster fishery if we’re allowing chemicals to keep killing the lobsters.”

“It’s time we stop looking at Long Island Sound like it’s just a recreational body of water and start looking at it like it’s a job site. We lost an entire industry on the Sound,” said Rep. Duff. “If we had a massive die-off on a farm in northern Connecticut, you can bet the DEP would still be conducting tests and would ban everything to find out why. I don’t understand why it’s different with the Sound.”

President of the Connecticut Lobstermen’s Association, Nick Crismale, says that restoration to the fishery would not succeed if the use of malathion were to continue. “We know. We were there. We saw what can only be the effects of pesticide poisoning. If the DEP doesn’t do something about the pesticides, there’s no way we can restore the lobsters,” says Mr. Crismale.

The DEP insists that water conditions, as well as a parasite killed the lobsters rather than a particular chemical. However, the School of Pathobiology and Veterinary Medicine at the University of Connecticut, in a test it conducted in 2003, found even minute traces of malathion can have lethal effects on lobsters. According to the UConn study, 0.55 parts per billion of malathion – equivalent to a teaspoon of chemical in an Olympic-sized swimming pool – either kills lobsters outright or severely degrades its immune system.

Mr. Crismale notes that attempts at the Lobster Institute of the University of Maine to infect healthy lobsters with the parasite the Stony Brook report cited failed. “A healthy lobster killed the parasite,” he said. “Lobsters affected by pesticides died. You be the judge.” To this he adds that there is more than enough circumstantial evidence for the DEP to act on the side of caution.

“We really don’t know what the killed the lobsters,” Mr. Crismale said. “But we are trying to bring them back, and we are spending money. I think the only way to find out is to begin to eliminate possible causes. We can’t do much to change the water temperatures. We can do something about pesticide use. If we eliminate the pesticide, and the lobsters get better, then we know we’re onto something.”

Malathion, used by many states as part of a mosquito control program, is an organophosphate (OP) insecticide that contaminates many water resources across the country. Malathion, like many other organophosphates, is linked to a host of adverse human and environmental. OPs are neurotoxic, disrupting normal nerve impulse transmission in organisms. Research shows that organophosphates are toxic to amphibians, birds, fish, and other aquatic organisms. A 2007 U.S. Geological Survey study found malathion’s breakdown product 10-100 times more toxic to amphibians than the parent product. Many OPs are already banned in England, Sweden and Denmark.

FLOC President Baldemar Velásquez was raised as a migrant farmworker. Since his childhood, he has worked in the fields and orchards of many states from Texas to the Midwest. He suffered the oppression and discrimination of migrant workers, and watched his parents humiliated many times from the injustices they experienced trying to support their family. Finally, after one incident when his father was cheated out of promised wages in front of the family, Baldemar began organizing migrant workers to stand up for their rights. Following the model of César Chávez, this protest led to the founding of FLOC.

As he struggled for justice for farmworkers, Baldemar realized that it was the agricultural corporations, rather than the growers, who control the conditions which affect farm laborers. The focus of FLOC became changing the structure of the agricultural industry through three-way negotiations among the major parties involved in agricultural production (farmworkers, growers, corporations). In 1978, Baldemar led over 2,000 FLOC workers on strike, the largest in agricultural history of Midwest, who demanded union recognition and a multi-party bargaining agreement. The following year, FLOC held its first constitutional convention as a labor union, and the workers voted to boycott Campbell Soup in their call for negotiations.

FLOC and their supporters struggled for eight years to win justice for farmworkers. In 1983, Baldemar led a 600-mile march of 100 farmworkers from Toledo, Ohio, to Campbell’s headquarters in Camden, N.J. Such actions and the pressure of supporters through the boycott eventually convinced Campbell Soup that the issue was not going away. In 1986, FLOC signed three-way contracts with Campbell Soup and its tomato and pickle grower associations in Ohio and Michigan.

These contracts changed the structure of agricultural industry, so that now farmworkers have an equal and direct voice in those conditions that affect their well-being. The FLOC movement has made labor history in bringing in different components of the industry into negotiated agreements. This victory was soon extended with Heinz and other major food-processing corporations in the Midwest, as well as fresh-market producers. Under union contracts, some 8,000 workers, many who had worked under an exploitive “share-cropping” arrangement, received employee status, and wages and benefits more than doubled. New housing in migrant camps and other conditions also significantly improved. Another important gain is that under grievance procedures, FLOC workers also have a direct voice in their day-to-day working conditions.

In 1998, FLOC began organizing farmworkers in North Carolina, the other major region in the U.S. where pickles are produced. After organizing thousands of farmworkers and a 5-year boycott of Mt. Olive Pickles, FLOC signed contracts in 2003 with the North Carolina Growers Association, which included workers involved with not only pickles, but also sweet potatoes, tobacco, Christmas trees, and other crops.

These contracts also set labor history, not only by changing the agricultural system but by also bringing in H2A “guest workers” under union contracts. Formerly, these workers had little say in who employed them or in the conditions of their work. Now through their union, they have their own direct voice, and are now directly involved in labor negotiations, grievance procedures, and building structures to address issues like transportation from their home areas in Mexico, health care, and immigration policies.

Baldemar’s vision and convictions continue to drive the efforts of FLOC in winning justice for migrant workers. He has become a recognized grass-roots leader and diplomat in the farm labor movement, immigrant rights movement, and social justice movements in the U.S. and around the world. His creativity and commitment to justice and human dignity have led to recognition by many labor, government, academic, and progressive organizations.

Monsanto’s permit on these GE soybeans was first granted by EPA in September 2007 and then extended in April 2008. Under the permit, plantings are permitted through July 31, 2009. Monsanto is requesting to extend the experimental program until December 31, 2010 and amend it by conducting tests with up to 0.466 pounds of Bt Cry1Ac protein in soybeans on 1,362 acres, according to the February 4th Federal Register notice. The testing trials will take place in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, and Virginia. Following the review of the application and any comments and data received in response to this solicitation, EPA will decide whether to issue or deny the EUP request, and if issued, the conditions under which it is to be conducted. Any issuance of an EUP will be announced in the Federal Register. Comments must be submitted by March 6, 2009.

There is some debate on what President Obama’s new administration’s position will be on GE crops as there is no reference to this issue on the White House website, www.whitehouse.gov. There are, unfortunately, signs that make some worry. For instance, during the presidential election, Obama responded to ScienceDebate2008’s questions on a number of issues, including GE, in which he stated, “Advances in the genetic engineering of plants have provided enormous benefits to American farmers. I believe that we can continue to modify plants safely with new genetic methods, abetted by stringent tests for environmental and health effects and by stronger regulatory oversight guided by the best available scientific advice. And, according to the article “Obama’s Team Includes Dangerous Biotech ”˜Yes Men,’” published in the Huffington Post, President Obama’s new Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack was “co-creator and chair of the Governors’ Biotechnology Partnership in 2000 and in 2001 the Biotech Industry Organization named him BIO Governor of the Year.”

Yet, there is still a chance for the promised change with President Obama’s new EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. In her recent testimony at her Senate confirmation hearing and open letter to EPA employees, Ms. Jackson pledges a return to scientific integrity and agency transparency. Environmental groups, which have been frustrated by years of unresponsive regulators, hope that Ms. Jackson’s EPA will use this promise of scientific integrity and transparency to increase protections for human health and environment that have been ignored, removed, or spent years in the system waiting for action.

Many feel the incorporation into food crops of genes from the natural bacterium, Bt, or the development of a herbicide resistant crop, as an approach to pest management is short sighted and dangerous. GE crops have encountered resistance from advocates throughout the world with concerns of insect resistance, superweeds, contamination of other plants from the same species through pollen drift, impact on human health, wildlife and other non-target organisms, soil contamination, hidden allergens, religious and moral considerations, antibiotic resistance, and unreasonable business contracts with farmers. A recent report by organic group the Soil Association, concludes that yields of all major GM varieties are equivalent to, or less than, those from conventional crops.

On November 10, 2008, the Austrian government released a report of long term research showing GE corn fed to mice significantly reduced their fertility over three to four breeding cycles within one generation. Similar effects were found in mice fed GE corn and bred over four generations. Roundup Ready crops, which are genetically engineered to be resistant to Monsanto’s best selling herbicide Roundup (active ingredient glyphosate) have been a boon to Monsanto’s profits, but not without environmental costs. Currently grown Roundup Ready crops include soy, corn, canola, cotton, and sugar beets. The crops’ resistance to glyphosate enables the use of the herbicide during the growing season without harming the crop itself. Glyphosate is now the number one herbicide in the United States. This has serious implications for public health and the environment, as glyphosate has been linked to cancer, reproductive effects, kidney and liver damage, and skin irritation; it is neurotoxic and toxic to fish and other aquatic organisms. Increased herbicide usage has also led to resistant varieties of “superweeds.” Over 70% of all GE crops are altered to be herbicide-resistant.

More and more GE crops are being grown around the world. The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications reports that biotech crops grew by 30 million acres, or 12 percent, in 2007 for a total of 282.4 million acres worldwide. Also astounding is the fact that 2 million more farmers planted biotech crops last year to total 12 million farmers globally. Notably, 9 out of 10, or 11 million of these farmers, are resource-poor farmers. In fact, the number of developing countries (12) planting biotech crops surpassed the number of industrialized countries (11), and the growth rate in the developing world was three times that of industrialized nations (21 percent compared to 6 percent.)

The long-term environmental effects of GE crops are largely unknown, and this was the premise of a recent successful lawsuit that Beyond Pesticides joined with other environmental and consumer groups. In September, a federal court upheld a ban on Roundup Ready alfalfa. The Court determined that the planting of genetically modified alfalfa can result in potentially irreversible harm to organic and conventional varieties of crops, damage to the environment, and economic harm to farmers.

Environmental and public health groups believe that, at a very minimum, labeling as a means of identifying products that contain genetically engineered ingredients are critical and complete regulatory review of all GE crops, which is currently not the case. Organic agriculture does not permit GE crops or the use of synthetic herbicides, and focuses on building the soil—minimizing its effect on climate change.

“Science must be the backbone for EPA programs,” she says in a memo to EPA staff. “The public health and environmental laws that Congress has enacted depend on rigorous adherence to the best available science. The President believes that when EPA addresses scientific issues, it should rely on the expert judgment of the Agency’s career scientists and independent advisors. When scientific judgments are suppressed, misrepresented or distorted by political agendas, Americans can lose faith in their government to provide strong public health and environmental protection.”

This promise contrasts the previous administration’s strained relationship with EPA scientists, which resulted in last spring’s report entitled, “Interference at EPA: Science and Policies at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.” Francesca Grifo, director of the Union of Concerned Scientists’s Scientific Integrity Program, said at the time, “Nearly 900 EPA scientists reported political interference in their scientific work. That’s 900 too many. Distorting science to accommodate a narrow political agenda threatens our environment, our health, and our democracy itself.” Reports of conflicts of interest within EPA’s Science Advisory Panels surfaced around the same time, and the Agency has acted against the urging of scientists and physicians in critical public health matters.

Transparency at EPA has also been criticized, most recently by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in its High Risk Series update last month. Ms. Jackson’s letter promises, “Public trust in the Agency demands that we reach out to all stakeholders fairly and impartially, that we consider the views and data presented carefully and objectively, and that we fully disclose the information that forms the bases for our decisions. I pledge that we will carry out the work of the Agency in public view so that the door is open to all interested parties and that there is no doubt why we are acting and how we arrived at our decisions.”

Based on more than five years of investigative research and reporting, Poisoned Profits reveals the cumulative scientific evidence connecting the massive increase in environmental poisons to the epidemic of disability, disease, and dysfunction among our nation ´s children. The authors conclude that the poisoning of the environment is as grave a threat to the future as any problem confronting our nation.

Yet even as individual parents and pediatricians struggle to fight illness, one child at a time, the public remains in the dark about the enormity of this crisis. Why? Because, according to the authors, corporations control the system, molding laws to their liking. The book shines a light on the motives and means of corporate-paid lawyers, “product defense” companies, fake grassroots groups, research centers and industry scientists.

In layman ´s language, Poisoned Profits explains how genes and the environment act upon each other, how mental and behavioral illnesses can be environmentally-triggered, affecting both the body and mind. And it explains the ways in which the fetus and young child are much more vulnerable than adults. Our nation picks up the tab for these illnesses. The book gives the dollar figures for reduced productivity on one hand, the staggering cost of care for sick children on the other.

Instead of fighting against disability and disease with cures, a never—ending struggle, the authors affirm that we now have the knowledge to prevent harm and they describe the solutions.

From Beyond Pesticides’ review of Poisoned Profits (read the full review)

This is a powerful, well-researched, and humanizing book about “the toxic plague that is harming our children.” The stories of the children victimized by toxic chemicals from Port Arthur, Texas to Dickson, TN to Toms River NJ to Fallon, Nevada, to Harlem, New York City are woven into an indepth discussion of technical studies, statistics, and the scientists’ voice.

The authors conclude that there is, however, adequate “proof” to find that purveyors of toxic chemicals are committing a crime and that government is the co-conspirator.

After leaving The New York Times, Mr. Shabecoff founded and published Greenwire, an online daily digest of environmental news. He has appeared on Meet the Press, Face the Nation, Washington Week in Review, CNN News, C-Span, National Public Radio, and the BBC. For his environmental writing, Shabecoff was selected as one of the “Global 500” by the United Nations’ Environmental Program. He received the James Madison Award from the American Library Association for leadership in expanding the public’s right to know. His previous books include A Fierce Green Fire: A History of the American Environmental Movement.

Ms. Shabecoff was executive director of the National Consumers League, the country’s oldest consumer organization, and executive director of the national nonprofit Community Information Exchange. Her previous books include A Guide to Careers in Community Development. Her work as a journalist has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Christian Science Monitor, and the International Herald Tribune, among other publications.

The new test called “magnetic particle enzyme immunoassay,” can detect triclosan at a concentration of 20 parts per trillion (ppt)-the equivalent of 1 ounce in 31 million tons. The research team at ARS evaluated the test by using it to detect triclosan and its derivative, methyl-triclosan, in river water, tap water and sewage samples from three municipal plants. They were able to detect triclosan below 20 ppt (the detection limit), indicating very low levels of triclosan in the collected samples.

ARS chemist, Weilin L. Shelver, at the ARS Animal Metabolism-Agricultural Chemicals Research Unit in Fargo, N.D., developed the new triclosan test in collaboration with Jennifer Church, Lisa Kamp and Fernando Rubio, a research team at Abraxis, Inc., of Warminster, Pa. Ms. Shelver says the test complements existing analytic methods, such as the gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), and is not intended to replace them, especially for routine monitoring of triclosan in a large number of water samples. The new test is faster, cheaper, and easier to use, especially for routine monitoring.

“This new technique is capable of measuring the triclosan content of a large number of water samples much faster than previous methods,” says Ms. Shelver. “We plan on expanding the assay’s use into the detection of triclosan in other environmental matrices and food.”

The researchers also tested wastewater samples. Their analysis showed that, before treatment, triclosan levels sometimes exceeded 3,000 ppt, but after treatment, those levels fell below 500 ppt. According to Shelver, the results confirmed other reports indicating that sewage plants’ purification steps removed some, but not all of the triclosan from water before it is discharged into the environment.

In the validation phase of their studies, the team compared the test results to those generated by GC-MS instrumentation, which is very sensitive but costly and requires dedicated lab space, as well as specialized training to use. In addition to correlating well with GC-MS analysis, the new test proved to be sensitive enough to distinguish triclosan from chemically similar contaminants.

Triclosan is a widely used antibacterial agent found in hundreds of consumer products, from hand soap, toothpaste and deodorant to cutting boards, socks and toys. A recent study found that triclosan alters thyroid function in male rats. Other studies have found that due to its extensive use in consumer goods, triclosan and its metabolites are present in waterways, fish, human milk, serum, urine, and foods. A U.S Geological Survey (USGS) study found that triclosan is one of the most detected chemicals in U.S. waterways and at some of the highest concentrations. Triclosan has been found to be highly toxic to different types of algae, keystone organisms for complex aquatic ecosystems. A recent U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) survey of sewage sludge found that triclosan and its cousin triclocarban were detected in sewage sludge at the highest concentrations out of 72 tested pharmaceuticals.

In its enforcement action, the DEP cites Ag-Mart Produce Inc., headquartered in Cedarville, Cumberland County, with hundreds of violations that include denying state environmental inspectors access to facilities, losing track of a highly toxic insecticide, failing to properly ventilate areas during pesticide use, failing to post important pesticide-safety information for workers, careless recordkeeping and using forbidden mixtures of pesticides.

Ag-Mart Produce widely markets its tomatoes under the brand name “Santa Sweets,” and employs 700 people throughout 17 farm locations in New Jersey. Ag-Mart also owns and operates other produce farms in North Carolina, Florida and Mexico.

“Ag-Mart has repeatedly shown a stunning disregard of laws and regulations intended to protect the workers who harvest their tomatoes, the people who consume them and New Jersey’s environment,” Commissioner Mauriello said. “Ag-Mart’s pesticide violations are the most serious DEP inspectors have ever uncovered. We have imposed a record-high penalty not only to hold Ag-Mart accountable for their failure, but to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

In 2006, the Florida farmworker family of Carlos Herrera Candelario, who was born without arms or legs, sued Ag-Mart over illegal pesticide exposure resulting in the boy’s birth defects. The case was settled out of court, with Ag-Mart agreeing to pay the medical expenses of the boy for life and provide him with a permanent income, but insisting that the settlement was not an admission of guilt.

Both the $931,250 fine and the accompanying DEP orders to fully comply with all pesticide laws stem from a series of inspections at Ag-Mart farm properties during 2005, 2006 and 2007, a review of corporate records and interviews with Ag-Mart management and employees.

In May 2006, for example, Ag-Mart Produce barred a DEP environmental investigator from inspecting facilities and forced the state investigator to wait several hours before finally allowing access only to a portion of a packing house that was not at issue.

“Deliberately denying DEP inspectors the right to enter and inspect their agricultural operations is an egregious offense because it impedes our ability to protect employees and the public from pesticide misuse,” Commissioner Mauriello said.

The DEP’s Compliance and Enforcement inspectors’ investigation of the corporate farm and its operations revealed a host of significant offenses including Ag-Mart Produce’s failure to keep under lock and key a highly toxic insecticide known as Monitor. Ultimately, Ag-Mart could not account for the 2.5 gallon container of the insecticide.

Other violations outlined in the DEP’s enforcement action include: applying pesticides more frequently than allowed by law and failing to provide proper ventilation for chlorine vapors in the tomato packing house — an incident which affected three DEP inspectors during a site visit.

Further, DEP inspectors found that on 17 occasions the company prematurely harvested pesticide-treated tomato crops, potentially exposing consumers to illegal pesticide residues in the marketplace.

Pesticide-free zones include playgrounds, picnic grounds and pavilion/rest areas, and the area 50 feet around each of these sites, as well as dog park/runs, pool areas and ball fields. Pesticide-free zones also include all waterways and a 300 foot buffer around any stream bank, pond, lake or natural wetland.

According to the township’s IPM plan, “[IPM] activities will consist principally of using native plant species and biological controls to encourage natural land management. Manual/mechanical controls, such as pulling weeds by hand or mowing, will be the first choice for management of invasive plant species when and where most feasible”¦Where plant, fungal or insect pests become otherwise unmanageable by the various low impact pest management methods, pesticides may be used as a control method of ”˜last resort.’ When pesticide use is required, public notification shall be made.” Pesticide notification includes posting information at the park information board 48 hours prior to the application stating the area to be treated and the pesticide to be used. The notice is to remain posted fro at least 72 hours after the application.

Management tools for the pesticide-free zones consist of native plantings, manual weed control, vinegar or citric acid products, burn-out, corn gluten, neem, horticultural oil, potassium soaps of fatty acids, boric acid, diatomaceous earth, microbe based insecticides, non-pesticidal pest traps and biological controls. Some advocates cite as an unfortunate loophole in the plan the authority to use, if other tools are ineffective, pyrethrin insecticides or the herbicide glyphosate as a last resort, both of which are toxic chemicals that pose public health and environmental risks.

Beyond Pesticides and organic land managers note that by using organic practices lawns and landscapes can be successfully managed without any toxic synthetic pesticides. Advocates are concerned that without a strict mandate to limit unnecessary toxic practices, managers may fall back on chemical-intensive methods. However, if the Township of Bernards implements its program rigorously and effectively, it will never need to get to this “last resort” scenario, advocates say.

The IPM plan also covers indoor and outdoor areas of special use sites such as exhibit gardens, amphitheater, and historic sites. For these structures, “[B]aits/gels will be the preferred option if sanitation/exclusionary measures fail to control a pest problem.”

“I think that wherever possible, the township and the individual homeowner should use little, if any, pesticides on their lawns. It’s just healthier,” said Bernard’s Mayor Carolyn Kelly in a My Central Jersey news article. According to the article, Pat Monaco, Bernards’ public works director, says, “[L]ittle, if any, pesticides or fertilizers [have been applied] on public open space in the past few years.”

Jane Nogaki, New Jersey Environmental Federation’s pesticide program coordinator and long-time activist member of Beyond Pesticides, told the reporter that the township will place the nationwide symbol for pesticide-free, the ladybug sign, at its parks this month making it the 26th community to adopt such programs in New Jersey.

“EPA does not have sufficient chemical assessment information to determine whether it should establish controls to limit public exposure to many chemicals that may pose substantial health risks,” the report states. “Actions are needed to streamline and increase the transparency of the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) and to enhance EPA’s ability under the Toxic Substances Control Act to obtain health and safety information from the chemical industry.”

New EPA administrator Lisa Jackson responded to the report with a prepared statement. “It is clear that we are not doing an adequate job of assessing and managing the risks of chemicals in consumer products, the workplace, and the environment,” she said. “It is now time to revise and strengthen EPA’s chemicals management and risk assessment programs.”

Specific issues raised include the potential obsolescence of EPA’s IRIS, which “contains EPA’s scientific position on the potential human health effects of exposure to more than 540 chemicals . . . because the agency has not been able to complete timely, credible assessments or decrease its backlog of 70 ongoing assessments.” Sixty-nine percent of those assessments had been ongoing for more than five years and some “that have been in progress the longest cover key chemicals likely to cause cancer or other significant health effects.”

For industrial chemicals, EPA is required to “demonstrate that certain health or environmental risks are likely before it can require companies to further test their chemicals.” GAO compares this negatively with Europe’s use of more precautionary policies, stating, “In contrast, the European Union’s Registration, Evaluation, and Authorization of Chemicals (REACH) (REACH) legislation generally places the burden on companies to provide data on the chemicals they produce and to address the risks those chemicals pose to human health and the environment.” Furthermore, EPA has not responded to recommendations made to reduce agency shortcomings and has “not sufficiently improved the scientific information available to support critical decisions regarding whether and how to protect human health from toxic chemicals.”

This national environmental conference, co-convened by Toxic Free North Carolina, is an important opportunity for community people nationwide to get together, share the latest information, meet with scientists and policy makers, and discuss local, statewide and national strategies on pest issues, pesticides, public health and the environment. As the home of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and recently named “America’s Foodiest Small Town,” the location is just the right place for participants to discuss fair, organic food and the impact of pesticides on public health.

Keynote speakers for the conference include:

Just added! Baldemar Velásquez, president of the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC), was raised as a migrant farmworker. Since his childhood, he has worked in the fields and orchards of many states from Texas to the Midwest. He suffered the oppression and discrimination of migrant workers, and watched his parents humiliated many times from the injustices they experienced trying to support their family. Finally, after one incident when his father was cheated out of promised wages in front of the family, Baldemar began organizing migrant workers to stand up for their rights. Following the model of César Chávez, this protest led to the founding of the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC).

Jim Hightower is a national radio commentator and author of many books, including his latest, Swim Against The Current: Even A Dead Fish Can Go With The Flow. Mr. Hightower has spent three decades battling the Powers That Be on behalf of the Powers That Ought To Be. Twice elected Texas Agriculture Commissioner, Jim has become a leading voice for those who no longer find themselves within shouting distance of Washington and Wall Street. He’s a modern-day Johnny Appleseed, spreading the message of progressive populism all across the American grassroots.

Philip Shabecoff, co-author of the new book Poisoned Profits: The toxic assault on our children, served as chief environmental correspondent for The New York Times for fourteen years. Mr. Shabecoff also founded Greenwire, an online digest of environmental news and was selected as one of the “Global 500” by the United Nations’ Environmental Program. His previous books include A Fierce Green Fire: A History of the American Environmental Movement.

Alice Shabecoff, co-author of Poisoned Profits: The toxic assault on our children, is a freelance journalist focusing on family and consumer topics. Her work has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Christian Science Monitor, and the International Herald Tribune, among other publications. She was executive director of the National Consumers League and Community Information Exchange. Her previous books include A Guide to Careers in Community Development.

Under the Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 405(d) stipulates that EPA must identify and regulate toxic pollutants that may be present in biosolids (sewage sludge) at levels of concern for public health and the environment. The survey, “Targeted National Sewage Sludge Survey” (TNSSS), sampled 74 selected waste water treatment plants in 35 states during 2006 to 2007. The survey, like its three predecessors, is conducted to determine which chemicals are present in sewage sludge and develop national estimates of their concentrations in order to assess whether exposures may be occurring and whether concentrations found may be of concern. The agency conducted analysis of sewage sludge samples for 145 compounds, including four anions (nitrite/nitrate, fluoride, water-extractable phosphorus), 28 metals, four polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, two semi-volatiles, 11 flame retardants, 72 pharmaceuticals, and 25 steroids and hormones.

The antimicrobial triclocarban is detected in all 84 samples collected, while its cousin triclosan is found in 79 out of 84 collected samples. Along with being the most detected pharmaceutical, triclocarban is also detected at the highest concentrations with a recorded maximum concentration of 4.41×10-5 ug/kg. This value is the highest ever detected in sewage sludge. Triclosan came in with the second highest concentrations in the category with a maximum of 1.33×10-5 ug/kg. The antibiotic, ofloxacin, had the third highest concentration with a maximum of 5.81 x10-4 ug/kg.

The TNSSS data confirms a host of independent scientific research which has found that these widely used antimicrobial chemicals are finding there way into the environment, contaminating surface and drinking waters, as well as potentially impacting human and environmental health. These findings also correlate with U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) studies that have found that triclosan is one of the most detected pharmaceutical chemicals detected in U.S. surface waters.

The implications of these sewage sludge findings are significant. Municipal waste water treatment plants generate tons of sewage sludge annually. Sewage sludge is widely recycled on agricultural lands and nonagricultural landscapes as fertilizer, and for land reclaiming and filling. The application of sewage sludge on terrestrial systems means that these antimicrobial compounds, as well as the host of other heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, hormones, organics and PBDEs found in this report may be absorbed by crops, earthworms and other soil organisms, and find their way up the food chain and into human diets. Many of these chemicals, such as triclosan, are persistent and do not break down easily. Their effects on soil microorganisms are still not understood. Major questions remain, such as whether these compounds harm soil microbes, or aquatic life if leached into streams.

Triclocarban and its cousin triclosan are used in a wide variety of consumer products ranging from antibacterial handsoap, cosmetics, clothing and toys. Both are used in products that are washed down the drain and subsequently reach surface waters and waste water treatment plants. They are both linked to hormonal disruption, especially in amphibians. Triclosan has also been found in urine, umbilical cord blood and breast milk. During the recent reregistration process for triclosan, which is also associated with numerous health impacts and antibacterical resistance, the EPA concluded that these are not of concern. Triclocarban is not a registered chemical with EPA, but falls under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Beyond Pesticides is actively working with other environmental and community groups to ban the non-medical uses of triclosan. In July and again in December 2008, Beyond Pesticides, Food and Water Watch, Greenpeace US, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club and dozens of public health and environmental groups from the U.S. and Canada, urged the agency to use its authority to cancel the non-medical uses of the antibacterial chemical triclosan in order to protect human health and the environment. For more information, visit our Antibacterial Program page.

“Sulfuryl fluoride has a long enough lifetime in the atmosphere that we cannot just close our eyes,” said Mads Sulbaek Andersen, a postdoctoral researcher in the Rowland-Blake laboratory and lead author of the study. “The level in the atmosphere is rising fast, and it doesn’t seem to disappear very quickly.”

Its climate impact in California each year equals that of carbon dioxide emitted from about one million vehicles. About 60 percent of the world’s sulfuryl fluoride use occurs in California. The insecticide is pumped into a tent that covers a termite-infested structure. When the tent is removed, the compound escapes into the atmosphere. Sulfuryl fluoride blocks a wavelength of heat that otherwise could easily escape the Earth, the scientists said. Carbon dioxide blocks a different wavelength, trapping heat near the surface.

“The only place where the planet is able to emit heat that escapes the atmosphere is in the region that sulfuryl fluoride blocks,” said Donald Blake, chemistry professor and co-author of the study. “If we put something with this blocking effect in that area, then we’re in trouble — and we are putting something in there.”

The chemists worry that emissions will increase as new uses are found for sulfuryl fluoride, especially given the ban of methyl bromide, an ozone-depleting pesticide regulated under the Montreal Protocol. Sulfuryl fluoride emissions are not regulated under the Montreal Protocol, though officials do consider it a toxic contaminant.

To measure sulfuryl fluoride’s atmospheric lifetime, the chemists put it inside a Pyrex chamber with compounds that are well understood in the atmosphere, such as ethane. They shined lamps on the chamber to simulate sunlight, which caused chemical reactions that eliminated the compounds from the air. By monitoring sulfuryl fluoride changes compared with changes to the well-known compounds, they were able to estimate its atmospheric lifetime.

“This is a cautionary paper,” said F. Sherwood Rowland, Donald Bren Research Professor of Chemistry and Earth System Science and co-author of the study. “It tells us that we need to be thinking globally – and acting locally.”

According to Beyond Pesticide research, sulfuryl fluoride is acutely moderately toxic by oral exposure (Toxicity Category II) and slightly toxic for acute inhalation (Toxicity Categories III and IV) and dermal vapor toxicity (Toxicity Category IV). Residents and workers are at risk for neurotoxic effects from acute exposure. Subchronic studies on rats have indicated effects on the nervous system, lungs, and brain. Developmental and reproductive effects have also been noted in relevant studies on rats. According to the National Research Council, fluorides might also increase the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease, and boys exposed to fluoride in drinking water are five times more likely to develop osteosarcoma , a rare form of bone cancer. Since sulfuryl fluoride was only registered for use as a fumigant for existing infestations, EPA waived the environmental fate data requirements for reregistration in 1993 and did not consider ecological risks. The Agency expects that non-target organisms would not likely be exposed to sulfuryl fluoride and that the pesticide would not leach to groundwater or persist in the environment for any significant amount of time.

According to the most recent data by the California Department of Pesticide Regulations, sulfuryl fluoride is the top pesticide used in the state in 2007 for structural pest control and 14th for all pesticide application sites, with over 2.1 million pounds used in 2007 for structural pest control, over 3,200 pounds for landscape and rights-of-way applications, and about 42,000 on agricultural products such as almonds, broccoli, dried fruits, prunes, rice and other agricultural commodities.

Non- and least-toxic alternatives to using sulfuryl fluoride for structural pest management are viable and protect public health and the environment from hazardous chemical exposure. Ecologically-based land management systems and practices such as organic agriculture and organic lawns and landscapes also hold the key to freeing our country of its chemical dependency.

Published in the January 2009 issue of the journal Epidemiology, the study is entitled “The Rise in Autism and the Role of Age at Diagnosis.” Results from the study suggest that research should shift from genetics to the host of chemicals and infectious microbes in the environment that are likely at the root of changes in the neurodevelopment of California’s children, including pesticides and household chemicals.

“It’s time to start looking for the environmental culprits responsible for the remarkable increase in the rate of autism in California,” said UC Davis M.I.N.D. Institute researcher Irva Hertz-Picciotto, PhD, a professor of environmental and occupational health and epidemiology and an internationally respected autism researcher. Dr. Hertz-Picciotto said that many researchers, state officials and advocacy organizations have viewed the rise in autism’s incidence in California with skepticism.

The incidence of autism by age six in California has increased from fewer than nine in 10,000 for children born in 1990 to more than 44 in 10,000 for children born in 2000. Some have argued that this change could have been due to migration into California of families with autistic children, inclusion of children with milder forms of autism in the counting and earlier ages of diagnosis as consequences of improved surveillance or greater awareness.

Dr. Hertz-Picciotto and her co-author, Lora Delwiche of the UC Davis Department of Public Health Sciences, initiated the study to address these beliefs, analyzing data collected by the state of California Department of Developmental Services (DDS) from 1990 to 2006, as well as the United States Census Bureau and state of California Department of Public Health Office of Vital Records, which compiles and maintains birth statistics.

Dr. Hertz-Picciotto and Ms. Delwiche correlated the number of cases of autism reported between 1990 and 2006 with birth records and excluded children not born in California. They used Census Bureau data to calculate the rate of incidence in the population over time and examined the age at diagnosis of all children ages two to 10 years old.

The methodology eliminated migration as a potential cause of the increase in the number of autism cases. It also revealed that no more than 56 percent of the estimated 600-to-700 percent increase, that is, less than one-tenth of the increased number of reported autism cases, could be attributed to the inclusion of milder cases of autism. Only 24 percent of the increase could be attributed to earlier age at diagnosis.

“These are fairly small percentages compared to the size of the increase that we’ve seen in the state,” Dr. Hertz-Picciotto said. The remaining percentage must then be explained by genetics or environmental inputs. “There’s genetics and there’s environment. And genetics don’t change in such short periods of time,” she said.

Dr. Hertz-Picciotto said that the study is a clarion call to researchers and policy makers who have focused attention and money on understanding the genetic components of autism. She said that the rise in cases of autism in California cannot be attributed to the state’s increasingly diverse population because the disorder affects ethnic groups at fairly similar rates.

“Right now, about 10 to 20 times more research dollars are spent on studies of the genetic causes of autism than on environmental ones. We need to even out the funding,” Dr. Hertz-Picciotto said. One recent study of environmental factors linked residential proximity to pesticides and a higher incidence of autism.

Dr. Hertz-Picciotto and her colleagues at the M.I.N.D Institute are currently conducting two large studies aimed at discovering the causes of autism. Dr. Hertz-Picciotto is the principal investigator on the CHARGE (Childhood Autism Risk from Genetics and the Environment) and MARBLES (Markers of Autism Risk in Babies-Learning Early Signs) studies.

“We’re looking at the possible effects of metals, pesticides and infectious agents on neurodevelopment,” Dr. Hertz-Picciotto said. “If we’re going to stop the rise in autism in California, we need to keep these studies going and expand them to the extent possible.”

The study entitled, “Statistical Modeling Suggests That Anti-Androgens in Wastewater Treatment Works Effluents Are Contributing Causes of Widespread Sexual Disruption in Fish Living in English Rivers,” and published in the journal Environmental Health and Perspectives identifies a group of river pollutants that cause testosterone to stop working. These chemicals, released from wastewater treatment operations into rivers and other surface waters are responsible for the feminization of male fish and abnormalities in male reproductive organs. Previous studies have attributed these problems in male fish to estrogenic compounds also found in surface waters.

However, this study is the first to identify anti-androgens with the feminization of male fish. It also indicates that male feminization may be the result of a rather more complicated interaction taking place between different classes of pollutants, resulting in an endocrine disrupting chemical cocktail.

“We have identified a new group of chemicals in our study on fish, but we do not know where they are coming from or what they are. We’ve only been able to measure their testosterone-blocking potential” said Susan Jobling, PhD, of Brunel University, one of the authors of the study.

The scientists analyzed anti-androgenic activity in samples of river water taken near 30 sewage outflows. They were able to demonstrate statistically that this activity could be linked with feminized fish found in the same rivers. Several chemicals in widely-used pharmaceuticals and pesticides are known to have anti-androgenic activity. They include several compounds found in agricultural pesticides.

Relatively high levels of anti-androgenic chemicals were detected near sewage outflows, suggesting they came from domestic sources. One possibility is that drugs excreted from the body may end up in rivers. However, the scientists also believe that the anti-androgens may also be seeping into rivers as run-off from agricultural land.

Feminization of male fish is a phenomena documented in recent decades in many rivers and surface waters in the US and Britain. Studies have long pointed to chemical contaminants such as pesticides and other endocrine disrupting chemicals, as having the potential for wreaking such hormonal chaos. Many pesticides have been implicated, including atrazine, permethrin, glyphosate (Round-Up) and 2,4-D. Other animals like polar bears, big cats, alligators and frogs have been observed with abnormalities in their reproductive organs, which have been attributed to environmental contaminants. Research has also shown that pregnant women exposed to environmental contaminants gave birth to babies with male reproductive defects.

A group of more than 30 professionals, including Beyond Pesticides staff, have been involved in the development process for the school IPM PSMP, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) IPM Program, the four USDA Regional IPM Centers, and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and spearheaded by the IPM Institute.

IPM programs are proven to be affordable and cost-effective. IPM can eliminate pests and pesticide-related hazards to children as it relies on pest prevention, monitoring, and control through effective education, sanitation, facility maintenance, mechanical controls, and other non-chemical methods. The least toxic pesticide is only used as a last resort after nontoxic options have been exhausted. Research and demonstration projects show that schools with IPM programs have up to 90% fewer pest problems and pest-related allergens compared to schools using pesticides as their sole method of pest management. A number of schools successfully implementing IPM can be found in Beyond Pesticides’ report, “Safer Schools.”

“With IPM,” states Dawn H. Gouge, urban entomologist with the University Arizona and co-editor of the document, “school staff and faculty report cleaner, better maintained facilities and better communication within the school community.”

At the heart of the document are extensive details to understanding common school pest biology, inspection and monitoring, and pest prevention that are key to successfully implementing IPM. This section of the document is an incredibly valuable tool to learning about an array of non-chemical pest management strategies. Unfortunately though, the document does not explicitly state that pesticides may be used only as a last resort in an IPM program nor does it clearly state the acute and chronic health effects of the pesticides listed in the document. Groups like Beyond Pesticides are concerned that IPM implementers using this document will be too quick to reach for potentially harmful chemicals, thus keeping school pest management programs’ status quo. Other concerns regarding the document surround the fact that toxic pesticides are listed as management tools for turf and landscape programs, yet these sites can definitely be managed without any pesticides. For example, Connecticut has passed a law that prohibits pesticides from being applied on school grounds, and several communities have begun implementing pesticide-free turf programs in the state. Examples prove that there is never a real justification or need to use pesticides in a school environment. This document should be at the forefront of the pesticide-free movement, leading schools down the path of the future, and not weakly attempting to simply reduce pesticides.

Children face unique hazards from pesticide exposure. They take in more pesticides relative to their body weight than adults in the food they eat and air they breathe. Their developing organ systems often make them more sensitive to toxic exposure. The U.S. EPA, National Academy of Sciences, and American Public Health Association, among others, have voiced concerns about the danger that pesticides pose to children. The body of evidence in scientific literature shows that pesticide exposure can adversely affect a child’s neurological, respiratory, immune, and endocrine system, even at low levels.

According to USDA, pest management practices in schools are in need of improvement; more than 50 studies have documented deficiencies, including unmanaged pest infestations, unsafe and illegal use of pesticides and unnecessary pesticide exposure. “Poor pest management and the use of pesticides can affect students’ learning abilities and long-term health, especially asthma, which is the number one cause of school absences,” states Colien Hefferan, with the USDA.

Federal agencies, such as EPA, USDA and CDC have been recommending schools adopt IPM for years with generally little impact on the number of schools adopting such programs. According to Beyond Pesticides’ research, only 11 states require schools adopt IPM programs and 7 states recommend school IPM. Beyond Pesticides report, “Are Schools Making the Grade?,” shows that only around 26% of schools in the U.S. have IPM programs, illustrating that recommendations prove to be largely ineffective. Without federal legislation like the proposed School Environment Protection Act (SEPA), school IPM adoption will likely remain spotty as it is now. For real change, passage of SEPA is critical to moving IPM ahead. SEPA is listed in the document as one of the regulatory priorities.

Pest Management Strategic Plans (PMSPs), such as this new one, are documents commissioned by USDA’s Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) and developed by groups of stakeholders to identify needs and priorities, typically for specific commodities and regions. PMSPs are used by funders, regulators, researchers, educators and others to help identify needs worth pursuing via grant making, research, Extension, education or regulatory avenues. PMSPs are living documents, designed to be updated periodically. Feedback is welcome for the next iteration of this document as well as participation in the implementation of the plan. For updates on the plan and information on how to provide input or participate in the effort, click here. Implementation of the plan will be managed by a steering committee composed of leaders designated by the four regional school IPM working groups.

The four contaminants are:

* Mercury
* Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and its breakdown products
* Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
* Polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE) flame retardants.

According to Elin Miller, EPA Regional Administrator in Seattle, a team of more than 20 federal and state agencies, Tribes, local governments and organizations teamed-up to draw this latest portrait of the toxic threats faced by the Columbia River Basin, which drains nearly 260,000 square miles across seven U.S. states and a Canadian province.

“This is troubling news,” said EPA’s Miller. “Today’s Report shows that toxics are found throughout the Basin at levels that could harm people, fish, and wildlife. Federal, tribal, state, and local efforts have reduced levels of some toxics such as PCBs and DDTs, but in many areas, they continue to pose an unacceptable risk. Tackling this problem will require a coordinated effort by all levels of government, Tribes, interest groups and the public.”

While several populations of important Basin species like bald eagles and ospreys have rebounded over the past two decades, some toxics such as mercury and PBDEs are increasing in wildlife and fish. For example, PBDEs showed an almost four-fold increase in some fish species in the Spokane River between 1996 and 2005. In addition, mercury increased in both osprey eggs in the Lower Columbia and in the northern pikeminnow in the Willamette River over the last decade. Elsewhere in the world, DDT and its metabolites have been found at high levels in melting glaciers and waters around Los Angeles, threatening wildlife like penguins and fish.

Another problem highlighted in the Report is a general lack of monitoring for toxics in many locations, making it difficult to know if toxics are increasing or decreasing over time.

“These information gaps need to be filled by more monitoring and stronger agency coordination so we can better understand the toxic effects on the river ecosystem and agree on priority projects to reduce those toxics,” said Miller.

There are many other contaminants in the Basin, including arsenic, dioxins, radionuclides, pesticides, industrial chemicals, and “emerging contaminants” such as pharmaceuticals. This Report does not characterize those contaminants, but EPA plans to address them in future work. USGS data has found such chemicals in surface water around the country.

The Report highlights many important federal, state, tribal and local efforts to reduce toxics already underway in the Basin, including:

* Cleanup of the Portland Harbor, Hanford, and Lake Roosevelt contamination sites
* Erosion control in the Yakima Basin to reduce legacy pesticide runoff
* Pesticide Stewardship Partnerships work in collaboration to reduce pesticide contamination in the Hood River and Walla Walla Basins
* PCB cleanup at Bonneville Dam and Bradford Island
* Legacy pesticide collections and pharmaceutical take-back programs.

The report concludes with six broad Toxics Reduction Initiatives intended to improve our understanding about the health of the Basin and strengthen coordination for ongoing and new efforts to reduce toxics. The Initiatives include: expanding existing toxics reduction activities throughout the Basin; identifying and characterizing the sources of toxics to the Basin; and developing a regional, multi-agency long-term monitoring and research program.

Since 2005, EPA has worked collaboratively with the Columbia River Toxics Reduction Working Group, a partnership of more than 20 federal, state, tribal, local, and nonprofit organizations. EPA developed the Report with the support of the Working Group.

According to N. Kathryn Brigham, Chair of the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, whose staff contributed to EPA’s Report, “Protecting, restoring and enhancing our first foods have been, and continue to be, one of the tribes’ highest priorities. Toxics in our water and fish are unacceptable.”

“The tribes have always worked together to care for the Columbia River and we’ll need to work together with the Region to resolve this issue now and for our future generations,” said Brigham. “EPA’s report is an important warning about toxics in our water and highlights concerns about their potential impacts.”

The EU stated: “The new Regulation confirms the importance that the European Commission gives to a high level of protection of human health and the environment, while at the same time harmonises further the availability of plant protection products. Moreover it intends to favour competition and reduce administrative burden for all stakeholders.”

The text contains provisions on the following main issues: (i) criteria for approval of active substances (ii) inspection and monitoring on production, storage, transport and use of plant protection products (iii) a simplified evaluation and authorization procedure (iv) the role of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (v) data protection — data sharing (vi) mutual recognition for plant protection products (vi) informing on the use of plant protection products to neighborrs (vi) reduction of tests on vertebrates

The EU’s approach to pesticide regulation moves it rules to a hazard-based, rather than a risk-based, system. The proposal would push farmers and chemical companies to replace the most toxic products with alternatives, remove provisional licenses for pesticides not yet registered with the EU, restrict the use of crop-dusters, and ban pesticides near sensitive areas.“One of the main aims of the proposal is to maintain a high level of protection for humans, animals and the environment. This is essential for our citizens,” said EU Health Commissioner Androulla Vassiliou, who advocated for this ban in May 2008. “We will not authorize what is known to be harmful for public health.”

For background, see Beyond Pesticides’ Daily News Blog.

Experts believe that the mutated fish, which survive only 48 hours after hatching, are the victims of pesticide drift from neighboring macadamia nut farms that routinely use endosulfan and the fungicide, carbendazim. Aquatic health expert and vice-president of the Australian College of Veterinarian Scientists’ Aquatic Animal Health Chapter, Matt Landos, PhD, has been investigating the phenomenon and concludes that there were no other probable causes to explain the fish and larval mortality. Dr. Landos documented evidence and completed a report which was sent to the state’s Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries last year. “The timing between the mist spraying and the affected larvae fits hand in glove,” Dr. Landos said.

His report also found that chickens, sheep and horses raised at nearby fish hatcheries are also recording abnormally high levels of fetal deaths and birth defects. Gwen Gilson, who runs a Boreen Point fish hatchery, says she has observed deformities on her farm for the past few years. When advised last year to dispose of her own fish stocks and obtain fresh bass eggs from the Noosa River, she was shocked to discover that they were also contaminated.

“It’s quite extraordinary. In fact several groups of brood fish, all which came from the Noosa River, had batches of larvae which were severely deformed with the primary deformity being two heads,” Dr. Landos said. “It’s the first time it’s been observed anywhere in Australia in association with bass. The hatchery is fringed by a macadamia plantation.”

Both endosulfan and carbendazim have been linked to birth and reproductive defects, liver toxicity and cancer. Endosulfan is banned in Europe and many other countries around the world, but is still used in Australia, as well as the U.S. Studies have found that endosulfan affects hormones and reproduction in aquatic and terrestrial organisms, has devastating effects on amphibians, especially in combination with other chemicals. It is highly toxic, bioaccumulative, and persistent. Its registration is currently under review in the U.S. by the EPA. Carbendazim, which was withdrawn from the U.S. market in 2001 by its manufacturer, DuPont, continues to be used in Australia. However, its registration status is currently under review, due to its link with developmental abnormalities in animals.

The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority said that it was concerned by Dr. Landos’s allegations and was seeking advice from the federal Department of Environment. In the meantime, the macadamia farmers say even though the chemicals are approved for use, they will wait for the findings of the investigation and will be happy to comply with any recommendations that arise.

On Friday, Australia’s neighbor, New Zealand, will become the 56th country to enact a ban on endosulfan. Later this year, the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants will consider elevating endosulfan to the final stage of assessment, which if passed would trigger a worldwide ban.

According to Beyond Pesticides, the EPA rule had allowed the weaker and more generalized standards under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) to trump the more stringent CWA standards. 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 subjective risk assessment with no attention to the safest alternative. Read Beyond Pesticides’ press release on EPA’s 2006 decision.

Several manufacturers and industry associations had joined the case to try to broaden the EPA’s 2006 exemption. The Court told them in no uncertain terms that their products are harmful to human health and the environment, and therefore EPA must regulate aquatic pesticide applications under the Clean Water Act.

“The decision today is a victory for clean water, and for fish and wildlife” declared Charlie Tebbutt, Western Environmental Law Center attorney and lead counsel for the environmental organizations and organic farms that challenged the rule. “Furthermore, this decision is another in a long line of rebukes to the Bush administration policies that overstepped their statutory authority and to the chemical manufacturers who peddle their poisons without concern to the effect on human health and the environment. We look forward to working with the new EPA to protect the environment rather than the chemical industry.”

With this decision, virtually all commercial pesticide application to, over and around waterways will now require National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. The NPDES permits will allow for local citizen input, and provide for accountability and oversight. The permits will also require the regulatory agencies to evaluate effects on fish and wildlife from individual applications, to monitor exactly how much of a pesticide application goes into in our nation’s waters, and to evaluate the cumulative impact this residual effect has on aquatic organisms.

“Time and again during these past eight years EPA has walked into federal courts and tried to defend absolutely indefensible rules like the one vacated today,” said Waterkeeper Alliance Legal Director Scott Edwards. “And time and again they’ve been sent back to the drawing board to rewrite these unlawful rules. Hopefully, EPA’s days of pandering to industry and other polluters and wasting taxpayers dollars in illegal rulemaking are drawing to a welcome close.”

The organizations bringing the case include Baykeeper, National Center for Conservation Science and Policy, Oregon Wild, Saint John’s Organic Farm, Californians for Alternatives to Toxics, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Waterkeeper Alliance, Environment Maine, Toxics Action Center, Peconic Baykeeper and Soundkeeper.

The organizations are represented by the Western Environmental Law Center, the National Environmental Law Center, the Pace Environmental Litigation Clinic, the Columbia Environmental Law Clinic and Waterkeeper Alliance.

Alex Palluzzi, Jr., director of the Branford Parks and Recreation Department, says he once was “on the other side” but now is motivated by the results he sees with organic and wants to get others to do the same. The town’s organic program took off when a two-acre park was donated to the town and Mr. Palluzzi and his team began a pilot project converting the field to organic. Its success proved to Mr. Palluzzi that organic land management works. Now, all twenty-four of the town’s fields are maintained with organic practices.

“We have not used pesticides in years,” says Mr. Palluzzi. Instead, the town relies on properly aerating the soil, overseeding, mowing the turf high, adding compost and testing the soil. One reason the organic program is so cost effective is because the town collects residents’ leaves for its compost and mulch.

Chuck Sherwood, field maintenance subcontractor for the Parks and Recreation Department, states in an article in The Sound, “When you put down this organic matter, we simply [find] you don’t need pesticides and these other fertilizers. With synthetics you are creating an artificial environment and when you lay down pesticides you are knocking out beneficial organisms too”¦ Organics has become the better value.” Organic turf management results in healthier soils, which produce thicker turf, disease resistance, less soil compaction and a softer playing field. Mr. Sherwood goes on to say that, “You have much healthier root systems that can sustain the repeated us.”

Malathion is present in natural water sources that have been exposed to urban and agricultural runoff. This organophosphate pesticide can be applied by planes in mosquito control program, and as esult enters water from the air.

Although direct lethal and sublethal effects of chemical contaminants have been documented, latent and long-term effects have been less well documented. Therefore, researchers sought to fill this knowledge gap and found, as suspected, that tadpole survival rates decreased and malformations and susceptibility to parasite encystment rates increased as a result of exposure to malathion concentrations mimicking those found in actual water sources.

Tadpoles are being exposed to increasing numbers of parasites in waters that are warming as a result of global climate change, and the researchers who performed this study speculate that, as a consequence, those exposed to malathion will have weakened immune systems that render them less able to defend themselves from invasion. Indeed, trematode infection was observed in tadpoles seven weeks after embryonic exposure to low concentrations of malathion.

This study shows that declines in amphibian populations are related to the agricultural application of malathion, which causes various kinds of damage to frog embryos and tadpoles that are, as a consequence, increasingly susceptible to parasite invasion. A similar study, published in October, 2008, found that some tadpole populations are being further threatened by malathion, as the chemical kills zooplankton, their primary food source. A 2007 U.S. Geological Survey study found malathion’s breakdown product 10-100 times more toxic to amphibians than the parent product.