Currently 80 percent of rivers draining to the Reef breach water quality guidelines due to farm fertilizer, pesticide and sediment runoff. The Queensland Government introduced the bill, entitled the Great Barrier Reef Protection Act, into Parliament to regulate farm practices and pesticide use. More specifically, the bill targets water pollution control at its agricultural origin. Failure to comply could trigger a $30,000 fine. Activists, while welcoming the new measure, say such legislation should have been introduced years ago. Environmental groups: WWF-Australia, Queensland Conservation, Australian Marine Conservation Society and Wildlife Queensland are united in their support for the new laws.

Premier Anna Bligh says the Great Barrier Reef Protection Act will decrease sediment, nutrients and pesticides entering the reef.

World Wildlife Fund (WWF) spokesman Nick Heath says the legislation will help the environment and farmers. “The Government’s just released a new estimate that there’s over $30 million worth of fertilizer and pesticide going onto the reef every year,” he said. “It’s a turning point for the Reef — welcome news after years of concern.”

“This is also a turning point for Australian agriculture — for too long there has been too little change in environmentally risky and outdated farm practices,” said Mr. Heath.

Many hope that once made law, clear prohibitions of unacceptable high risk practices are set, and that $175m, which has been promised as a commitment to reef protection, is properly allocated between new on-ground enforcement, education and extension capacity. Activists say that the Federal and State governments must unite investments ($200m from the Commonwealth and $175m from the State) to ensure the deepest pollution cuts in the shortest time. Activists are hoping for a 50 per cent cut in pollution over 4 years, as well as an annual review of progress. The legislation would also indirectly help protect 60,000 jobs dependent on the reef’s health.

However, farm industry groups find this new measure to be unnecessary and that farmers are being unfairly persecuted. Grant Maudsley, from Agforce, said monitoring runoff and recording the use of chemicals was already in place and that the amendments would not produce any real environmental outcomes. Secretary of the Proserpine Milling Co-operative (an association for the sugar mill industry) Ian McBean, says the government is over-regulating and that the sugar industry is already implementing environmentally friendly practices. “We really seem to be heading down a nanny state path here,” said Mr. McBean. “The sugar industry has made a very concerted effort to improve its environmental performance and yet it seems to me that the state government is claiming that those very practices that the industry has implemented will only work if they’re under government control.”
But Col McKenzie from the Association of Marine Park Tourism Operators notes that 5 years ago, when the reef rescue plan was first put out, asking for voluntary changes would not have been enough. Inevitably, according to Mr. McKenzie, any voluntary measure would have to be followed up with legislation.

The Great Barrier Reef, the largest coral reef system on earth and home to thousands of species of fish, coral, birds, turtles and other sea mammals, is under threat from overfishing, land-based pollution and coral bleaching exacerbated by increased sea temperatures due to global warming. The herbicides atrazine and diuron have been detected at river mouths, inshore reefs and intertidal seagrass monitoring locations. Most runoff comes from pastoral and sugar cane plantation activities. Phased out organochlorine pesticides such as dieldrin and the breakdown products of DDT, are still being detected in mud crabs collected along the reef coast as well.

Previously only 4.6 percent of the reef was fully protected, but after public campaigning and pressure from WWF, the Australian Government committed to a plan to protect 33 percent of the reef. For more information on the Great Barrier Reef visit WWF-Australia.

While Beyond Pesticides encourages community leaders, scientists, policy makers and activists to attend its annual National Pesticide Forum to get together, share information, and elevate the pesticide reform movement, the new online videos of much of the Forum’s educational sessions make a similar contribution. Beyond Pesticides believes that sharing this information beyond the Forum as an educational and organizing tool will prove extremely valuable, and encourages readers of the Daily News blog to share the presentations with friends, community organizations, networks and state and local decision makers. New presentations will continue to be added to the website in the upcoming weeks.

Also this month, Beyond Pesticides expanded its online social network with a page on Facebook and a Twitter account and encourages members, activists, concerned individuals, organizations and others to become a Facebook “fan” and follow our “tweets” on Twitter. By joining us on these social networking websites, you’ll get the latest news on pesticide science and regulation, action alerts on breaking issues, as well as videos, podcasts and other links that we think will interest you sent directly to your computer or mobile phone.

Facebook was launched in 2004 and made available to the general public in 2006. Its mission is to give people the power to share and make the world more open and connected. People create accounts to keep up and connect with friends and issues they care about. Twitter, launched in 2006, is a free social networking and “micro-blogging” service that enables its users to send and read other users’ updates known as tweets. Tweets are text-based posts of up to 140 characters, displayed on the user’s profile page and delivered to other users who have subscribed to them. Learn more about Facebook here and Twitter here.

The study, “Professional Exposure to Pesticides and Parkinson’s Disease,” published in Annals of Neurology, involved individuals affiliated with the French health insurance organization for agricultural workers who were frequently exposed to pesticides in the course of their work. Occupational health physicians constructed a detailed lifetime exposure history to pesticides by interviewing participants, visiting farms, and collecting a large amount of data on pesticide exposure. These included farm size, type of crops, animal breeding, which pesticides were used, time period of use, frequency and duration of exposure per year, and spraying method.

“Our findings support the hypothesis that environmental risk factors such as professional pesticide exposure may lead to neurodegeneration,” notes lead study author Alexis Elbaz M.D., Ph.D., of Inserm, the national French institute for health research in Paris, and the University Pierre et Marie Curie.

The second most common neurodegenerative disease affecting more than one million people in the U.S., Parkinson’s disease occurs when nerve cells in the substantia nigra region of the brain are damaged or destroyed and can no longer produce dopamine, a nerve-signaling molecule that helps control muscle movement.

In the past year several studies have been published that make the connection that Parkinson’s disease is caused by a combination of environmental risk factors such as pesticide exposure and genetic susceptibility. For example, residential exposure to an agriculture application of the fungicide maneb and the herbicide paraquat significantly increases the risk of developing Parkinson’s disease, according to a University of California, Berkeley study. A study by University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) researchers found pesticide exposure and genetic variability in the dopamine transporter (DAT), a protein that plays a central role in dopaminergic neurotransmission of the brain, interact to significantly increase the risk factor for Parkinson’s disease. Another study by UCLA researchers found chronic exposure to commonly used dithiocarbamate fungicides, such as ziram, contribute to the development of Parkinson’s disease. A University of Texas study found a strong correlation between Parkinson’s disease patients and the use of the pesticide rotenone. In addition, Duke University and University of Miami researchers studying related individuals who share environmental and genetic backgrounds found a significant association between Parkinson’s disease and use of herbicides and insecticides, such as organochlorines and organophosphates.

The statement, “Definitive Global Rejection of Genetically Engineered Wheat,” was released to counter the May 14 “Wheat Commercialization Statement,” released by industry lobby groups in the three countries. The industry pledged to “work toward the goal of synchronized commercialization of biotech traits in our wheat crops.” The joint statement was released by 15 groups in Australia, Canada and the U.S., including the National Farmers Union, the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, the National Family Farm Coalition in the U.S. and the Network of Concerned Farmers in Australia, and counters the six stated industry arguments in favour of GE wheat.

“GE wheat is a potential disaster of huge proportions,” said Terry Bohem, Vice President of the National Farmers Union in Canada. “We refuse to allow Monsanto and industry groups to restart any campaign to commercialize GE wheat.”

The group statement centers on the pledge: “In light of our existing experience with genetic engineering, and recognizing the global consumer rejection of genetically engineered wheat, we restate our definitive opposition to GE wheat and our commitment to stopping the commercialization of GE traits in our wheat crops.”

“Genetic engineering for wheat would be a calamity for all wheat farmers. Consumers across the world have already rejected the idea of GE wheat but corporations are intent on controlling this crop through their gene patents,” said Julie Newman, wheat grower and member of the Network of Concerned Farmers in Australia.

In 2004, Monsanto withdrew its applications for approval for GE wheat in Canada and the U.S. due to intensive consumer and farmer protest. The wheat is engineered to be tolerant to Monsanto’s brand-name herbicide Roundup (glyphosate). Genetically engineered crops have been linked to increased pesticide use, insect and weed resistance, and have been banned in large parts of the developed world. In addition, genetic drift can hurt farmers who choose not to plant GE crops. Beyond Pesticides and other groups have successfully sued to prevent GE threats to organic and conventional farming.

“Monsanto needs to accept defeat,” said Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, a coalition of 18 groups. “The industry groups in our three countries are promising to force this product on all of us but today we reiterate our pledge to stop them.”

“Monsanto and industry groups in our countries need to abandon their agenda of forcing GE wheat onto a market that doesn’t want or need it,” said Katherine Ozer, Executive Director of the National Family Farm Coalition in the U.S.

The sanctions levied in this case are as a result of the use of the new authority granted to the ODA by the 2007 Legislature in fining Oregon growers $10,000 per violation. The department must determine a violation was willful and negligent to issue the $10,000 maximum fine. The previous maximum fine in Oregon was $1,000 for a first violation and $2,000 for a repeat violation. The Oregon growers were fined the maximum in 18 infractions. ODA tested 86 samples of soil, weeds, onion foliage and bulbs from 60 fields in uncovering 18 positive tests. The investigations were initiated based on a tip.

The pesticides, bentazon (trade name Basagran) and carbofuran (trade name Furadan), were illegally used on 18 fields during the 2008 growing season, and were found to have levels of pesticide residue for either one of the products, two with levels of carbofuran and 16 fields with levels of bentazon. Two fields worth of onions were destroyed voluntarily by the farmers. The pesticides are not registered for use on onions.

A 2006 investigation uncovered evidence that more than a dozen Oregon growers misused Furadan on onions. A pesticide dealer was also fined $89,910 for selling Furadan to an unlicensed applicator 81 times over a 30-month period. Following those incidents, the state legislature granted the ODA authority to increase the dollar amount it can fine growers for off-label pesticide application. Onion shippers are also considering imposing mandatory testing on all onions at the growers’ expense to ensure no illegal materials are present.

Carbofuran is a toxic insecticide that does not meet current U.S. food safety standards. Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revoked regulations that permit residues of the pesticide carbofuran in food. EPA’s action will eliminate residues of carbofuran in food, including all imports, in a move to protect people, especially children, from dietary hazards. The action will also force the removal this pesticide from the market.

Bentazon is a selective herbicide associated with human and environmental health impacts including some developmental toxicity effects as seen in rats and rabbits, and poses a chronic reproductive health risk to birds.

The survey shows Oregonians give the highest ratings for irrigation and soil conservation practices. However, 77 percent of Oregonians say they are either very or somewhat concerned about the impact of agricultural use of pesticides and fertilizers on water quality and human health. Respondents are also very or somewhat concerned about the impact of pesticides and fertilizers on food safety (74 percent), wildlife habitat (71 percent), air quality (68 percent), and soil conservation (60 percent). Women and Portland metro area residents are consistently more concerned than other groups.

One survey question asked if farmers could still feed the world using only organic practices. About 44 percent believe that is possible. Interestingly, the Oregon Department of Agriculture believes that this finding characterizes a disconnect between public opinion and agriculture’s need for pesticides.

Many respondents are uncertain about government regulation of agriculture. The survey shows 53 percent believe regulations are about right or too strong, but a third are not sure. Many want stronger regulations for food processing – not surprising considering recent high profile food safety issues. The highest percentage of respondents (42 percent) believes regulations protecting drinking water quality and protecting streams and rivers are not strong enough.

In 2008, a similar survey gauged Oregonians’ opinions of production agriculture on a wider scale. That led to a focused follow-up survey conducted this spring in two areas of concern and opportunity- water and pesticides. The latest snapshot is the result of a statewide telephone survey of 500 Oregonians completed on behalf of the Agri-Business Council of Oregon with the financial support of numerous agriculture organizations.

The draft language is largely based on the food provisions of H.R. 759, the Food and Drug Administration Globalization Act of 2009, introduced in January by Reps. Dingell, Stupak, and Pallone. The Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009 incorporates technical assistance from the Obama Administration as well as other stakeholders. According to Rep. Waxman, the legislation grants the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authorities and resources it needs to better ensure the safety of the nation’s food supply.

“The current state of our food safety system is dangerous not just for the American public, but also for the food industry itself,” said Rep. Waxman, Chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee. “This bill recognizes that the hallmark of strong food safety legislation must be a shared responsibility for food safety oversight between FDA and industry. This legislation will go a long way toward restoring Americans’ confidence in our food supply.”

Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009 summary:

Ӣ Creates an up-to-date registry of all food facilities serving American consumers, requiring all facilities operating within the U.S. or importing food to the U.S. to register with the FDA annually.
”¢ Generates resources to support FDA oversight of food safety through an annual registration fee of $1,000 as well as requiring facilities to pay for FDA’s costs associated with reinspections and food recalls.
Ӣ Requires all facilities operating within the U.S. or importing food to the U.S. to implement safety plans that identify and protect against food hazards.
Ӣ Requires safety plans for fresh produce.
Ӣ Increases inspections of food facilities from six to 18 months for high risk facilities to three to four years for low risk facilities.
”¢ Enhances FDA’s ability to trace the origin of tainted food in the event of an outbreak of foodborne illness through electronic record-keeping.
Ӣ Allows FDA to require food to be certified as meeting all U.S. food safety requirements by the government of the country from which the article originated or by certain qualified third parties.
Ӣ Expands laboratory testing capacity.
Ӣ Provides FDA new authority to issue mandatory recalls of tainted foods, strengthens criminal penalties and establishes civil monetary penalties that FDA may impose on food facilities that fail to comply with safety requirements.
Ӣ Permits FDA to develop voluntary security guidelines for imported foods.
”¢ Enhances FDA’s ability to assure the safety of new infant formulas before they go on the market.
Ӣ Directs the Secretary to include food in an active surveillance system to assess more accurately the frequency and sources of human illness.
”¢ Enhances FDA’s ability to block unsafe food from entering the food supply.
Ӣ Requires FDA to conduct a safety review of the use of carbon monoxide in meat, poultry, and seafood products.
”¢ Requires posting on FDA’s website of documentation submitted to FDA in support of a “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) notification.
Ӣ Requires country-of-origin labeling and disclosure.

While supporting steps to ensure a safe food system, the public health and sustainable agriculture communities point out a handful of problems with the draft language. In terms of protecting public health, advocates are disappointed that the bill does not require companies to conduct microbial testing for pathogens and report positive results to FDA. Others point out that that the greatest public health threats come from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), and that society could benefit most from CAFO-specific regulations.

Others oppose the flat $1,000 fee, which will have a far greater impact on a small local processor that only distributes locally than a multinational company with millions in sales. Mark Schonbeck from the Virginia Association for Biological Farming suggests a small $50 flat fee plus a percentage of annual total dollar value of product above $100,000 per year. He points out that even the large scale growers and packers were advocating a fee for Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) certification audit based on volume. “They suggested 1.5 cents per case, so that a small farmer selling 1,000 cases of greens would only pay $15, and a large farm selling 1,000,000 cases would pay $15,000, which they could afford.”

Elizabeth Henderson of Peacework Organic Farm believes that the regulations should be voluntary for family-scale farmers. “Each farm should develop its own food safety plan based on its own risks,” Ms. Henderson explains. “For certified organic producers part of this has already been completed in our organic farm plans. An excellent public program for food safety would provide assistance to farms in creating these plans, and then support the implementation of the plans with payment or cost-share for making the improvements that would make the farm safer”¦Farms that sell direct and are not certified could invite their customers to come and see for themselves, as is offered in the NOFA-NY Farmers Pledge. Let’s find a way to make it clear to the public that we support food safety, but hold off the mandatory programs.”

Maryland Department of Transportation
The Maryland Department of Transportation’s State Highway Administration (SHA) had a major dilemma — how to mow the turf amid the meadows and bogs that protect the threatened Bog Turtle around a major highway bypass in the state. The best solution — use goats as lawn mowers. In late May, SHA enlisted a herd of 40 goats from a local farmer to begin a conservation grazing project on approximately eight acres of meadows and bogs in Carroll County.

“Avoiding and minimizing environmental impacts is a challenging part of highway maintenance and construction,” said Neil J. Pedersen, SHA Administrator. “Using goats to maintain turf in an environmentally sensitive area is not only an innovative idea, it clearly demonstrates our vision of a greener highway system.”

Using traditional mowing methods could have led to a major disruption of the Bog Turtle habitat and could injure or kill the turtles. Goats are light weighted animals and pose no significant hazard to the Bog Turtle or their habitat along the Bypass.

SHA is using goat grazing as a two-year, $10,000 pilot, which will be evaluated after one year to measure the success of the project and to determine if the project should be expanded to other environmentally sensitive regions across the state. The cost of the goats includes delivery to and from the project, supplemental feed, and routine veterinary care. The goats will graze the fields from mid-May until the beginning of September, which is the end of the mowing season.

The goat grazing project is in sync with Governor Martin O’Malley’s Smart, Green and Growing Initiative, introduced in October 2008. The Initiative was created to strengthen the state’s leadership role in fostering smarter, more sustainable growth, and inspire action among all Marylanders to achieve a more sustainable future, to create more livable communities, improve transportation options, reduce the state’s carbon footprint, support resource based industry, invest in green technologies, preserve valuable resource lands and restore the health of the Chesapeake Bay.

Hempstead, New York Nature Preserve
Five Nigerian dwarf goats are being used as an environmentally responsible method of eradicating brush, weeds and other vegetation overgrowth at the Norman J. Levy Park and Preserve in Hempstead, New York.

“We were looking for a way to control vegetation overgrowth that was in keeping with our nature preserve’s mission,” said Town Supervisor Kate Murray. “Lawn mowers and line trimmers emit greenhouse gases, and herbicides can pollute nearby waterways. Adding these goats to the town’s workforce is an effective way to control weeds and it’s environmentally responsible.”

The goats, which cost just over $1,000, complement a flock of insect eating fowl known as Guinea Hens. The birds, which are indigenous to North Africa, have been a resounding success in the control of ticks at the preserve. In fact, there has not been a single tick incident reported at the facility in the four years since the fowl were employed as a nature-friendly insecticide. Visitors who tour the park will be given a presentation on all of the park’s features, including the new livestock.

Google Corporate Campus, Mountain View, California
Google hired 200 goats instead of hiring a mowing crew to manage the weeds and brush growing on their corporate campus in Mountain View, California in order to reduce fire hazard, according to Dan Hoffman, Google’s Director Real Estate and Workplace Services. The company’s hiring of the goats costs about the same mowing.

Northwest Water Reclamation Plant, Mesa, Arizona
The City of Mesa, Arizona Utilities Department has employed 80 goats to manage 30 acres of brush and weeds at one of their water reclamation plants as an alternative to mechanical mowing. The goats are finishing up a six-month contract to clear the slopes of three water retention ponds on the site.

“The traditional use of machines and manpower is difficult due to the design of the retention ponds and the amount of vegetation at the site,” said Utilities Department Water Division Director Bill Haney. “Using goats allows us to use a more sustainable and environmentally responsible form of weed control.”

The Utilities Department website states, “While using goats is a non-polluting form of vegetation control, they also produce better results than the use of machinery. Goats possess a unique characteristic that separates them from almost all other types of livestock; they will eat just about anything resembling a plant. They can clear vegetation from hard-to-reach places, and they’ll eat the seeds that pesticides and mowing leave behind, preventing vegetation from coming back next year. Environmentally, goats reduce the use of motorized vehicles, which in turn reduces air pollution and usage of fossil fuels, involve no toxic chemicals or pesticides and they produce biodegradable waste material that naturally breaks down into the soil. Goats also make better economic sense than utilizing mechanical means which are more costly.”

According to an Arizona Republic article, with a savings of $10,000 for this project alone, “the city will consider other places the goats can be used.”

City of Cheyenne, Wyoming
The city of Cheyenne, Wyoming has hired Ecological Services, to provide weed control, flood control and stream bank restoration along two creeks that go through the city with about 700 goats. Ecological Services, owned by Lani Malmberg, a Beyond Pesticides’ board member, is a a goat based weed control business that provides up to 1,500 cashmere goats to naturally remove weeds and return any land to a healthy, natural ecosystem. She has worked extensively in Colorado, Montana, Wyoming, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah for federal, state, county, and city governments, homeowners associations, corporations and private landowners for noxious weed control, fire fuel load abatement, re-seeding, watershed management, and land restoration.

Goats are being put to work worldwide for ecological land management. In what it says is a drive to help the rural community stave off the recession, Mitsubishi Motors New Zealand (MMNZ) is offering a free goat with every new Triton sold before August. (Triton is the brand name of truck, and is not sold in the U.S.)

“We firmly believe that New Zealand’s recovery is in the hands of the rural sector and they’re the people who are buying our [Triton],” said MMNZ general manager of sales and marketing Peter Wilkins. “Goats improve farm productivity by providing an environmentally friendly defense against noxious weeds and they’re a lot cheaper than toxic sprays”.

Fumigants, which are among the most toxic chemicals used in agriculture, are gases or liquids that are injected or dripped into the soil to sterilize a field before planting. Even with plastic tarps on the soil, fumigants escape from the soil and drift through the air into schools, homes, parks and playgrounds. Strawberries, tomatoes, peppers, carrots and potatoes are some of the major crops for which fumigant use is high.

The agency says these measures will reduce fumigant exposures to bystanders: people who live, work, attend school, or spend time near agricultural fields that are fumigated, and increase overall safety of fumigant use by requiring greater planning and compliance. Some of EPA’s new measures include creating or altering buffer zones, enforcing posting requirements, adding measures to protect agricultural workers, and strengthening training programs. Changes will begin to take effect in 2010 and 2011.

However, advocates criticize the agency’s buffer zone (an established non-treatment area in which it is known that chemical from the treated area drifts) provision, which can incorporate residential areas, as severely limited and question the enforceability of the standard. First, buffer zones can be a little as 25 feet. Second, the provision allows residential areas (including employee housing, private property, buildings, commercial, industrial, and other areas that people may occupy or outdoor residential areas, such as lawns, gardens, or play areas) to actually be in the buffer zone if, “The occupants provide written agreement that they will voluntarily vacate the buffer zone during the entire buffer zone period, and reentry by occupants and other non-handlers does not occur until the buffer zone period has ended.” The provision continues, “For formulations with greater than 80% methyl bromide, air monitoring with direct-read instruments shows concentrations are below action levels before reentry is permitted.”

N4vertheless, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, in a press release concludes that, “With new restrictions, we’re allowing the continued use of fumigant pesticides without risking human health and the environment.” She continues, “Full transparency and the best science shaped a plan to protect the economic interests of agricultural communities and the public health of farm workers and consumers.”

EPA’s proposed rule was released for public comment in July 2008, prompting criticism from environmental and farmworker activists for the minimal progress achieved by these changes. For example, Jeannie Economos, pesticide health and safety coordinator with the Farmworker Association of Florida, said at the time, “We appreciate the mitigation measures that EPA has taken. However, we foresee that enforcement could still be problematic. Any exposure of a worker or a farmworker community is a risk that we shouldn’t take. The best solution is to ban fumigants altogether.” Rather than ban these toxic chemicals, EPA chose to tinker with buffer zones and monitoring (including, in the case of chloropicrin, to reduce required buffer zones). For a summary of EPA’s complete changes, click here.

According to the U.S. EPA’s pesticide sales and usage statistics, pendimethalin is the third most commonly used home and garden (and other non-agricultural use) herbicide and the 7th most commonly used herbicide in agriculture, totaling 21-30 million pounds applied annually in the U.S. Pendimethalin is listed by the U.S. EPA as a Group C – Possible Human Carcinogen and is a suspected endocrine disruptor. Pendimethalin has been found to cause central nervous system depression in mice and rats. In addition, the herbicide potentiates hypnosis caused by other drugs such as pentobarbitone, barbitone or ether, and lengthened recovery from drug effects. The percentage of apoptosis increased in mouse embryos exposed to low doses of pendimethalin, suggesting that at levels considered to be safe in humans by regulatory standards pendimethalin has adverse effects very early in development.

EPTC is also a commonly used herbicide, with more than 5-8 million pounds used annually, according to EPA. It is regularly used on feed and food crops such as alfalfa, potato, and corn as well as non-agricultural uses such as rights-of-way and landscapes. EPTC, a thiocarbamate pesticide, is a cholinesterase inhibitor and is linked to increasing the risk of developing asthma.

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading case of cancer-related death in the U.S. The National Cancer Institute estimates that pancreatic cancer will lead to more than 35,000 deaths in 2009 and more than 42,000 new cases will be diagnosed in 2009. There has been a slight increasing trend in pancreatic cancers since the early 1990’s, with higher rates in men than woman.

Several studies published over the past 15 years have linked pesticide exposures to pancreatic cancer:
* A 2009 study analyzing pesticide sales in different parts of Brazil and cancer mortality rates a decade later found a statistically significant correlation with the mortality rates for several cancers, including cancer of the pancreas;
* A 2007 Finnish study found a more than six-fold increased risk of pancreatic cancer for male gardeners;
* A 2007 study identifying risk factors for pancreatic cancer in Egypt found a more than two and a half increased risk for those individuals exposed to pesticides;
* A 2001 National Cancer Institute study found excess risk for occupational exposure to fungicides (odds ratio (OR) 1.5) and herbicides (OR 1.6);
* A 2000 case-control study in Spain found occupational exposure to pesticides causes a three-fold increased risk for pancreatic cancer;
* A 1999 study of aerial pesticide applicator pilots found a significantly elevated risk for pancreatic cancer;
* A 1995 case control occupational study in Finland found a 1.7 increased risk for occupational pesticide exposure; and,
* A 1993 case-referent study of Italian farmers found a significantly increased risk of pancreatic cancer among licensed pesticides users with greater than 10 years experience.

Last month, EPA announced that it will be moving forward with preliminary testing of 67 active and inert pesticide ingredients for possible endocrine disrupting effects. Yet, according to prominent researcher and author Theo Colborn, Ph.D., EPA’s testing protocol will not detect chemicals that can alter development and function of the pancreas, and its hormone, insulin, which could lead to diabetes and obesity.

The study entitled “Organohalogen contaminants and metabolites in cerebrospinal fluid and cerebellum gray matter in short-beaked common dolphins and Atlantic white-sided dolphins from the western North Atlantic” is the first of its kind to find toxic chemicals in the brains of marine mammals. The study identified several contaminants including organochlorine pesticides like DDT, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and flame retardants in the cerebrospinal fluid and cerebellum gray matter of several species of marine mammals including the short-beaked common dolphins, Atlantic white-sided dolphins and the gray seal. PCBs were found in alarmingly high concentrations. Researchers found parts per million concentrations of PCBs in the cerebrospinal fluid of a gray seal.

“We found parts per million concentrations of hydroxylated PCBs in the cerebrospinal fluid of a gray seal. That is so worrisome for me. You rarely find parts per million levels of anything in the brain,” remarked researcher, Eric Montie, PhD.

Dr. Montie, lead author of the study, performed the research in collaboration with Mark Hahn and Chris Reddy of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) and Robert Letchre of Environment Canada.

“We don’t really know the effect of that level in these animals,” he says. “The first step was just to see if these chemicals were present in the brain. And they are. So how do you monitor that? And that’s something we’re trying to develop methods to see if these chemicals do have neurotoxilogical effects,” says Dr. Montie.

Dr. Montie plans to find out how these chemicals might impact marine mammal health. This summer, Dr. Montie will partner with scientists from NOAA to test the hearing in dolphins living near a Superfund site in Georgia and compare it to dolphins from locations where ambient concentrations of pollutants are significantly lower. The researchers view their work as the forefront of a new field of research, something that might be called neuro-ecotoxicology. Previous studies have been focused on how concentrations of marine pollutants affected the animal’s immune system or its hormone systems, however, the authors of this study say their results indicate that contaminants in the ocean can affect the neurological development of marine mammals.

DDT, which is currently banned in much of the world, has been shown to cause cancer and reproductive toxicity. While an overall reduction in contaminant levels in coastal waters of the U.S., studies have found DDT and other persistent pollutants in Arctic animals like whales, penguins, seals and birds. However, new concern over the concentrations of these chemicals in the oceans arise as DDT, its metabolites and other persistent organic pollutants, including PCBs and PBDEs are being released at high levels in melting glaciers, further threatening the health of marine animals. In 2007, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reported extremely high concentrations of the pesticide DDT in fish caught in California’s Los Angeles county waters. According to the survey, the fish caught in the area contain the world’s highest-known DDT concentrations.

“Multiple animal studies have shown that GE foods cause damage to various organ systems in the body,” said Amy Dean, M.D., public relations chair and board member of AAEM. “With this mounting evidence, it is imperative to have a moratorium on GE foods for the safety of our patients’ and the public’s health.”

The AAEM calls for:

— A moratorium on GE food, implementation of immediate long term safety testing and labeling of GE food.
— Physicians to educate their patients, the medical community and the public to avoid GE foods.
— Physicians to consider the role of GE foods in their patients’ disease processes.
— More independent long term scientific studies to begin gathering data to investigate the role of GE foods on human health.

“Physicians are probably seeing the effects in their patients, but need to know how to ask the right questions,” said Jennifer Armstrong, M.D., president of AAEM. “The most common foods in North America which are consumed that are genetically modified are corn, soy, canola, and cottonseed oil.”

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine was founded in 1965, and is an international association of physicians and other professionals interested in the clinical aspects of humans and their environment. The Academy is interested in expanding the knowledge of interactions between human individuals and their environment, as these may be demonstrated to be reflected in their total health. The AAEM provides research and education in the recognition, treatment and prevention of illnesses induced by exposures to biological and chemical agents encountered in air, food and water.

Aside from harm to human health through consumption, farming genetically engineered crops leads to increased pesticide use, and is harmful to famers’ bottom lines. According to a report by the by the Center for Food Safety and Friends of the Earth International, GE 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 GE varieties. Thanks to GE 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 GE 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.

Despite more than a decade of hype, the biotechnology industry has not introduced a single GE crop with increased yield, enhanced nutrition, drought-tolerance or salt-tolerance, according to a report by the Union of Concerned Scientists. Despite 20 years of research and 13 years of commercialization, genetic engineering has failed to significantly increase U.S. crop yields. Additionally, the biotechnology industry’s own figures show that 85% of all GE crop acreage worldwide in 2008 was planted with herbicide-tolerant crops. 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.

With the time between initial conception to the early years of development being the most critical in establishing lifelong health, a well-balanced diet rich in organic fruits and vegetables helps establish healthy food-taste preferences, promotes healthy patterns of cell division and largely eliminates exposures to approximately 180 pesticides known to increase the risk of developmental abnormalities. Furthermore, this combination of reducing pesticide exposure and consuming nutrient-dense organic foods can help people manage weight and prevent diabetes.

“The conscious decision to purchase organic food to improve one’s health, or the health of family members, is a critical first step that millions of individuals have decided to take,” said Charles Benbrook, Ph.D., co-author of the report and the chief scientist at TOC. “Often this first step is the hardest. As a nation, we need to encourage and reward people taking this and other steps toward a healthier diet.”

The report reveals that an organic diet before and during pregnancy can help the fetus develop a healthy endocrine system, which regulates metabolism and tissue function. Children and adults with healthy endocrine systems have an easier time managing their weight and blood sugar levels and are less likely to combat obesity and diabetes in life. However, exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals in life’s earliest stages — including pesticides used in conventional farming methods — can upset the child’s development and create health problems later on.

“When I started my practice, it was unusual to see a child with high blood pressure, high blood glucose and triglycerides, and/or increased waist size,” said Alan Greene, M.D., a leading pediatrician and board member of The Organic Center. “But today, about two-thirds of U.S. teens already have at least one of these middle age conditions that predispose children to metabolic syndrome later in life.”

Currently, two out of three American adults are overweight or obese, and if current trends continue, the vast majority will be overweight by 2048. To combat this alarming trend, the report suggests a new model for health and well-being at every age: an organic Mediterranean-style diet high in fiber and vegetable proteins and low in carbohydrates, meats and saturated fats. With organic fruits, vegetables and grains that contain, on average, 30% higher levels of antioxidants than their conventional counterparts, people at all life stages – from pre-natal health to elder years – can take important steps to promote their well-being.

Study co-authors, Christine McCullum-Gomez, Ph.D. and Richard Theuer, Ph.D., highlight two key conclusions, “Breastfeeding your baby for at least six months and adopting a Mediterranean diet, based on whole grains, vegetables, dried beans, olive oil, garlic, fresh herbs, seafood and fruit, will help keep you and your children on the right path to good health.”

Connecticut State Representative Terrie Wood said, “We know that contact with pesticides and chemicals are not compatible with healthy living. It is time to err on the side of caution and ban these pesticides from use any place our children and grandchildren learn and play.”

The Connecticut bill, Pesticide Applications at Child Day Care Centers and Schools, extends the states’ existing law that prohibits the application of pesticides on kindergarten through 8th grade schools’ grounds to include day care center grounds as well. In addition, the bill requires only licensed pest control operators apply pesticides in day care center facilities or on their grounds. There is an exemption that allows general use pesticides to be used in an emergency situation when a pest, such as ticks, stinging insects or mosquitoes, pose an immediate threat to human health. Children are required to be kept away from any pesticide application area. Prior notification, including the name of the active ingredient, target pest, location and date of application, must be provided to all parents and guardians whose children attend the day care at least 24 hours before a pesticide application.

The bill delays the implementation date for banning the use of lawn chemicals on school athletic fields and playgrounds one year to July 1, 2010. Until then, schools must follow a state Integrated Pest Management program for the fields and playgrounds, which continues to allow some toxic chemical use.

The Illinois bill, Pesticide and Lawn Care Product Application, prohibits the application of pesticides when children are present at licensed day care centers and the treated area must remain unoccupied for at least 2 hours following the application. It also requires toys and other items to be removed from the application area. Day care centers must maintain a registry of parents and guardians who want to receive four-day advance notice of a pesticide application. In addition, the bill requires public schools provide four-day advance notice of lawn pesticide applications either by way of a registry or universal notification to parents and guardians of students attending the school. The Illinois Department of Public Health is directed to recommend a pesticide-free turf care program to all day care centers and public schools.

“It is critically important to protect children from pesticide exposure on their playgrounds and playing fields,” said Rachel Rosenberg, Safer Pest Control Project’s executive director. “Safer Pest Control Project applauds the Illinois legislators who passed this law unanimously in both Houses. This new law, which awaits Governor Quinn’s signature, will be a critical component of protecting children from early childhood exposures to pesticides. Pesticide free lawn care is easy and affordable, and we hope that this law inspires other states to take similar action.”

According to Beyond Pesticides research, 34 states have adopted laws that address pesticide use at schools and/or day care centers:
* 21 states recommend or require schools to use IPM;
* 16 states restrict when or what pesticide may be applied in schools;
* 17 states require posting of signs for indoor school pesticide applications;
* 26 states require posting of signs for pesticide application made on school grounds;
* 23 states require prior written notification to students, parents, or staff before a pesticide application is made to schools; and
* 7 states recognize the importance of controlling drift by restricting pesticide applications in areas neighboring a school.

Although these laws are instrumental in improving protections, Beyond Pesticides notes that truly protective state and local laws establish mandatory and comprehensive IPM programs that includes organic land management, bans the use of toxic pesticides for cosmetic/aesthetic purposes, and prohibits the use of hazardous pesticides, such as probable, possible or known carcinogens, endocrine disruptors, reproductive toxins, developmental toxins, neurotoxins, and toxicity category I and II pesticides. The least toxic pesticide should only be used after non-chemical strategies have been tried. For a comprehensive review of state IPM laws and criteria for evaluation, see Ending Toxic Dependency.

While EPA, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National PTA, among others, recommend schools adopt IPM programs, without minimum federal standards, such as the proposed School Environment Protection Act (SEPA), the protection provided children is uneven and inadequate across the country. SEPA provides basic levels of protection for children and school staff from the use of pesticides in public school buildings and on school grounds by requiring schools implement an IPM program, establishing a list of least-toxic pesticides to be used as a last resort, and requiring notification provisions when pesticides are used.

The vulnerability of infants and children to the harmful effects of pesticides has attracted national attention over the last decade. Schools from across the country document a growing trend to adopt safer pest management strategies that dramatically reduce pesticides in the schools, providing children with a healthier learning environment. Schools that have chosen to adopt such strategies, such as an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program, use alternatives to the prevailing chemical-intensive practices because of the health risk such practices pose to children and other school users. A comprehensive IPM program is proven to be cost effective and yield better pest control results.

School and day care centers are places where children need a healthy body and a clear head in order to grow and learn. Children are especially sensitive to pesticide exposures as they take in more pesticides relative to their body weight than adults and have developing organ systems that are more vulnerable and less able to detoxify toxic chemicals. Even at low levels, exposure to pesticides can cause serious adverse health effects. Numerous studies document that children exposed to pesticides suffer elevated rates of childhood leukemia, soft tissue sarcoma and brain cancer. Studies also link pesticides to childhood asthma, respiratory problems, and inability to concentrate.

The National Agricultural Statistics Service has tracked chemical usage in agriculture since 1990. The program conducts surveys on pesticide usage on agricultural commodities, with surveys for fruits and vegetables conducted on alternating cycles. The fruit chemical use surveys are conducted in the odd numbered years. Apples, cherries, citrus, figs and peaches are just some of the fruits monitored.

In May 2008, USDA abruptly halted NASS citing an $8 million program shortfall. Environmental groups wanted the survey reinstated because it contains valuable information about which pesticides are used in sensitive watersheds and which affected public and environmental health. The information was also widely used by universities and food industry researchers to help farmers monitor and reduce the amount of pesticides they use. A coalition of 44 environmental, sustainable farming, and health advocacy organizations, including Beyond Pesticides, urged the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to reverse the decision.

In July 2008, the U.S. Senate put the program back in the 2009 Senate budget bill. The Senate Appropriations Committee adopted language that reinstated USDA’s chemical usage reports in the 2009 budget and directed the department not to disrupt ongoing market analysis reporting and to notify the committee in advance of any termination of other programs. “It was found very quickly to be the only source of unbiased information,” said Joe Reilly, associate administrator of NASS. “It usually doesn’t happen that way, that you get support from all sides,” he continued.

Aimee Code, water quality specialist for the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP), said the survey results are versatile. “It is good for almost everyone. It gives baseline information,” she said.

The reinstatement of the fruit survey is positive news, but Ms. Code said she is disappointed that the program is solely focused on agriculture. The survey would be more helpful if it included urban uses of pesticides as well, she said. Results from the 2009 fruit survey will be published in July 2010.

Tell EPA to stop its foot-dragging and protect salmon and steelhead from toxic pesticides.

The six pesticides that scientists have reviewed so far are some of the most dangerous chemicals used today. All six””chlorpyrifos, diazinon, malathion, carbaryl, carbofuran, and methomyl””are neurotoxic and pose serious risks to both humans and wildlife. While many of these pesticides have been phased out for residential use, they continue to expose wildlife and farmworkers through their use in agriculture. Thirty-one more chemicals will undergo review by scientists at the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in the next three years.

The new restrictions require EPA to prohibit application of the six pesticides in or near salmon and steelhead habitat. They also require EPA to prohibit application when the weather may cause the pesticides to drift or run off into streams.

EPA has one year to fully implement these restrictions or face liability under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). While it has been over six months since fisheries biologists released the first set of directions, EPA has yet to take even the first step toward implementing the necessary protections. Take a few moments and tell EPA to get moving.

Talking Points:

— Even at low levels, these toxic pesticides harm salmon and steelhead by causing abnormal sexual development, impairing swimming ability, reducing growth rates, and killing salmon prey.

— These pesticides pose serious risks to public health””especially the health of young children. All six chemicals are potent neurotoxins, and some are listed as likely carcinogens.

— The states and other federal agencies have invested hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to protect endangered salmon runs. EPA is undermining that investment by not immediately taking steps to keep dangerous pesticides out of salmon habitat.

Background:

The survey, conducted by Lieberman Research Group on behalf of OTA, measured the growth of U.S. sales of organic foods and beverages as well as non-food categories such as organic fibers, personal care products and pet foods during 2008. Results show organic food sales grew in 2008 by 15.8 percent to reach $22.9 billion, while organic non-food sales grew by an astounding 39.4 percent to reach $1.648 billion.

“This marks another milestone for the organic food market,” said Christine Bushway, OTA’s Executive Director. “Organic products represent value to consumers, who have shown continued resilience in seeking out these products.”

With tough economic times, consumers have used various strategies in continuing to buy organic products. Because most venues now offer organic products, consumers have the opportunity to shop around. Increased use of coupons, the proliferation of private label brands, and value-positioned products offered by major organic brands all have contributed to increased sales.

Organic agriculture embodies an ecological approach to farming that does not rely on or permit toxic pesticides, chemical fertilizers, genetically modified organisms, antibiotics, sewage sludge, or irradiation. Instead of using these harmful products and practices, organic agriculture utilizes techniques such as cover cropping, crop rotation, and composting to produce healthy soil, prevent pest and disease problems, and grow healthy food and fiber. Organic farming also protects the farmworkers and their families from chemicals that have been shown to cause a myriad of chronic health effects, such as cancer, endocrine disruption and a series of degenerative diseases like Parkinson’s disease. Research shows that organic farming eliminates a significant source of toxic chemical contamination in the environment from groundwater pollution and runoff to drift.

Organic agriculture can increase world food security as it offers affordable, immediately usable, and universally accessible ways to improve yields and access to nutritional food in developing countries. A 2008 report cited in the paper from the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) notes that not only can organic agriculture feed the world but it may be the only way we can solve the growing problem of hunger in developing countries. UNEP states that its extensive study “challenges the popular myth that organic agriculture cannot increase agricultural productivity.” In an analysis of 114 farming projects in 24 African countries, UNEP reports that organic or near-organic practices result in a yield increase of more than 100 percent.

Organic foods have been shown to reduce dietary pesticide exposure. A study published in 2008 finds that children who eat a conventional diet of food produced with chemical-intensive practices carry residues of organophosphate pesticides that are reduced or eliminated when they switch to an organic diet. Another study finds that converting the nation’s eight million acres of produce farms to organic would reduce pesticide dietary risks significantly.

There are numerous health benefits to eating organic, besides a reduction in pesticide exposure. According to research from the University of California, a ten-year study comparing organic tomatoes with standard produce finds that they have almost double the quantity of disease-fighting antioxidants called flavonoids. A study out of the University of Texas finds organically grown fruits and vegetables have higher levels of antioxidants as well as vitamins and minerals than their conventionally grown counterparts. A comprehensive review of 97 published studies comparing the nutritional quality of organic and conventional foods shows that organic plant-based foods (fruits, vegetables, grains) contain higher levels of eight of 11 nutrients studied, including significantly greater concentrations of the health-promoting polyphenols and antioxidants. The team of scientists from the University of Florida and Washington State University concludes that organically grown plant-based foods are 25 percent more nutrient dense, on average, and hence deliver more essential nutrients per serving or calorie consumed. A study by Newcastle University, published in the Journal of Science of Food and Agriculture, finds that organic farmers who let their cows graze as nature intended are producing better quality milk.

In addition, the adoption of organic methods, particularly no-till organic, is an opportunity for farming both to mitigate agriculture’s contributions to climate change and to cope with the effects climate change has had and will have on agriculture. Good organic practices can both reduce fossil fuel use and provide carbon sequestration in the soil through increased soil organic carbon. Higher soil organic carbon levels then increase fertility and the soil’s ability to endure extreme weather years.

Last week, Beyond Pesticides reported that the Agriculture Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan announced $50 million for a new initiative to meet the Obama Administration’s promise to encourage more organic agriculture production.

“Assisting organic producers is a priority of the 2008 Farm Bill as well as for Secretary Vilsack and the Obama Administration,” said Dr. Merrigan. “The objective of this initiative is to make organic food producers eligible to compete for EQIP financial assistance.”

The 2009 Organic Initiative is a nationwide special initiative to provide financial assistance to National Organic Program (NOP) certified organic producers as well as producers in the process of transitioning to organic production. Organic producers may also apply for assistance under general EQIP.

Under the Organic Initiative required minimum core conservation practices will be determined by specific resource concerns. The practices are: Conservation Crop Rotation; Cover Crop; Nutrient Management; Pest Management; Prescribed Grazing; and Forage Harvest Management. States must consider using any appropriate practice that meets the resource concern on a particular operation.

Applications received from organic producers or producers in transition to organic farming will be accepted under this initiative between May 11 and May 29. Applications will be ranked at that time.

To assist with eligibility questions, there are two separate National Screening Tools for applicants (one for producers transitioning for the first time and one for certified organic producers transitioning additional land or adding additional conservation practices). Ranking criteria has been established based on resource concerns that link to the NOP objectives and the core conservation practices.

The 2009 Organic Initiative will be administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Interested producers should visit their nearest USDA Service Center to determine eligibility. Additional information on the 2009 EQIP Organic Initiative is available here.

The Executive Council confirmed at a 2007 meeting that the Bay Program would not meet its commitment to clean up the Bay by 2010 as per the 2000 Chesapeake Bay Agreement. At that meeting, short-term two-year deadlines were set. However, since measures to improve the Bay’s heath have not been successful in the nine years since stakeholders were tasked with its clean-up, it is unclear how these milestones will be met by the two-year deadline in 2011. Chairman of the Chesapeake Executive Council, Virginia Governor Timothy Kaine, stated at the 2007 meeting that shorter term goals create the pressure to produce results. Many states are now tasked to significantly increase the pace of cleanup. For example, Maryland must increase progress to reduce nitrogen entering the Bay by 138 percent and Virginia by 86 percent.

The federal committee will be chaired by EPA and will manage new plans by a team of seven federal agencies to strengthen and bring accountability to efforts to protect and restore the bay. In addition to the executive order, Administrator Jackson announced that EPA’s renewed commitment to bay restoration will include a bay-wide set of strict pollution caps backed by state action plans and federal consequences to assure progress; sharp reductions in air pollutants that impact the bay; robust use of existing authorities; key funding support, and scientific and technical assistance.

“This executive order is a strong signal of the President’s commitment to restoring this national treasure, which is so vital to the environment, the local economies, and the way of life for millions of people,” said Administrator Jackson. “We are bringing the full weight of this partnership to bear on this challenge, and I am extraordinarily hopeful about what we can accomplish working together.”

Federal agencies will create action reports that will be integrated into a draft federal strategy within 180 days of the signing of the executive order. The federal strategy will include annual commitments and progress reports and periodic reviews by an independent evaluator. For its part, EPA’s plan will identify actions to make full use of Clean Water Act tools, including strengthening existing permit programs and extending coverage where necessary. The agency also will implement a compliance and enforcement strategy to ensure that regulated entities follow the rule of law.

EPA is also set to work with its state partners to develop a bay-wide total maximum daily load (TMDL) by December 2010 that will assign strict pollution caps to meet the state’s existing Chesapeake Bay water quality standards. The TMDL will identify the total pollution caps necessary to meet clean water standards and allocate pollution budgets to the states. Those allocations will be used to develop detailed state action plans that will be supported by two-year commitments and accountability provisions with federal consequences for lagging performance. According to the EPA, the TMDL process will involve strong public participation, including a first round of public meetings this summer. By meeting these and future milestones, the Bay states must put in place all pollution control measures necessary for a restored Bay no later than 2025.

“We have charted a new course for the Chesapeake Bay’s recovery that will succeed because it includes the short-term goals necessary to make steady progress and is backed by federal and state leaders who share a profound conviction to protect our environment,” said Governor Kaine. The Executive Order also includes: reducing water pollution from federal property; developing a Bay climate change strategy; improving agricultural conservation practices; and expanding public access to the Bay.

The widespread cosmetic use of chemicals on residential lawns and agricultural pesticide applications are significant contributors to the high loads of nitrogen and other chemical runoff to the Chesapeake Bay. A study by the U.S. Geological Survey found that “synthetic organic pesticides and their degradation products have been widely detected at low levels in the watershed, including emerging contaminants such as pharmaceuticals and hormones.” Pesticides such as glyphosate (Round-up), atrazine, carbofuran, lindane and others have been detected in headwater streams that feed into the Bay. The annual report, “State of the Bay“, published by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation consistently reports that the health of the Bay is declining.

Beyond Pesticides has information about the growing movement in the U.S. to eliminate the cosmetic use of chemicals on lawns and landscapes. Please visit https://www.beyondpesticides.org/lawn/factsheets/index.htm. Learn more about the importance of the Chesapeake Bay at the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.

More than 160 governments (including those countries that have ratified the Stockholm Converntion) agreed last Saturday to include the nine pesticides and industrial chemicals to the list of 12 other persistent organic pollutants (POPS) in order to strengthen a global effort to eradicate some of the most toxic chemicals known to humankind. The nine chemicals are:

Ӣ alpha hexachlorocyclohexane Рproduced as an unintended byproduct of lindane;
Ӣ beta hexachlorocyclohexane -produced as an unintended byproduct of lindane;
Ӣ hexabromodiphenyl ether and heptabromodiphenyl ether- used in flame retardants;
Ӣ tetrabromodiphenyl ether and pentabromodiphenyl ether- used in flame retardants;
Ӣ chlordecone -an agricultural pesticide;
Ӣ hexabromobiphenyl, or HBB Рa flame retardant;
Ӣ lindane Рused in creams for treatment head lice; also has been used in other insecticides;
Ӣ pentachlorobenzene Рused in PCB products, dyestuff carriers, as a fungicide, a flame retardant
Ӣ PFOS, perfluorooctane sulfonic acid, its salts and perfluorooctane sulfonyl fluoride Рappears in a wide range of products from electronics components to fire-fighting foam (listed for elimination or restriction)

The Stockholm Convention, which was adopted in 2001 and entered into force 2004, requires Parties to take measures to eliminate or reduce the release of POPs into the environment.

“Just five years after this convention came into force, we will have nine new chemicals added to the list of those that the world community agrees we need to control and ultimately get rid of,” said Achim Steiner, executive director of the U.N. Environment Programme (UNEP), which hosted the conference.

Donald Cooper, executive secretary of the Stockholm Convention, set out why the banned substances were exceptionally dangerous: They cross boundaries and are found everywhere, from the Tropics to Polar Regions; they persist for long periods in the atmosphere, soil and water, and take years to degrade; they accumulate in bodies; they accumulate in food chains. The chemicals can also damage reproduction, mental capacity and growth and cause cancer, Mr. Cooper said.

Countries that have ratified the treaty also enact national legislation to enforce the bans and restrictions it imposes. Participating countries have one year to say whether they will ban or restrict the chemicals or whether they will need more time or an exemption. The additions to the list make it possible for developing countries to receive international help in containing and destroying stockpiles of the chemicals which might otherwise seep into the soil and water supply.

Last month, groups in the U.S. called for the international ban of lindane and its inclusion onto the Stockholm Convention. The coalition of groups called on the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Acting Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration Joshua Sharfstein M.D., to support listing of lindane under the international treaty without exemption for lotions and shampoos (“pharmaceutical uses”). It is unclear whether the listing of lindane as a POP to be banned would have any impact in the U.S. since the U.S. has not ratified the Stockholm Convention.

Lindane is a neurotoxic, organochlorine pesticide which has been linked to seizures, developmental disabilities and hormone disruption. It is known to be particularly hazardous to children. Lindane and associated isomers are among the most ubiquitous chemicals in the Arctic environment, contaminating traditional foods of Indigenous communities in the region. Lindane is banned in the state of California and has also been restricted in Michigan for use on head lice and scabies.

In the document, “Transforming Government’s Approach to Regulating Pesticides to Protect Public Health and the Environment,” which identifies what the Obama administration can/should take on under existing authority/statutory responsibility, Beyond Pesticides, Pesticide Action Network North America and other coalition groups urge Congress to ratify the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) in a way that gives the U.S. EPA the authority to take prompt action on pesticides and other chemicals identified as POPs by the international community, and to protect children from dangerous pharmaceutical pesticide products like lindane.

The final carbofuran tolerance rule becomes effective December 31, 2009, a time frame that EPA says growers need to use up existing stocks and transition to alternatives. Phase out periods of known hazards (without notice to the public at point of sale) have long been criticized by adocates who argue that recalls be adopted in similar fashion to other consumer products that are pulled off the market at the time a danger is defined.

EPA is proceeding to cancel the remaining carbofuran registrations, or licenses, which will address risks to pesticide applicators and birds in treated fields. In 2006, EPA identified significant dietary, ecological and worker risks from the use of carbofuran and Began negotiating cancellation with FMC. While the company voluntarily withdrew 22 uses of this pesticide, it was insufficient for the agency to conclude that dietary exposures to carbofuran are safe. Safety advocates have long maintained that EPA’s regulation by negotiation with pesticide manufacturers has created an agency culture of unprotective compromises and delays.

EPA released the draft rule for public comment last summer, an announcement which was greeted positively by activistsl. Carbofuran has been recognized as a danger to humans and wildlife, particularly migratory birds, since the 1980s. Most recently, the National Marine Fisheries Service has released a Biological Opinion finding that carbofuran harms endangered salmon and steelhead.

For more information on the tolerance revocation and further actions, visit EPA’s cancellation process page.

Citizens for a Green Camden’s first milestone victory provided information which led to the passage of its policy to eliminate the use of pesticides in parks and on playing fields, which led to a similar policy in neighboring Rockport. They also compare notes with ofher citizen groups.

The organization continues to work to educate homeowners about the dangers of using poisons on their lawns, running programs and providing written educational materials for residents at the town office. It was able to convince the town Bed and Breakfasts to join their efforts by not using pesticides on their properties, advertising those partners at the local Chamber of Commerce for visitors to see. “The organization continues its education outreach through various other community-based methods to eventually eliminate poisons being used on lawns in the entire Camden community,” continues the EPA press release.

Camden’s pesticide policy states, “All pesticides are toxic to some degree and the widespread use of pesticides is both a major environmental problem and a public health issue. Federal regulation of pesticides is no guarantee of safety. Camden recognizes that the use of pesticides may have profound effects upon indigenous plants, surface water and ground water, as well as unintended effects upon people, birds and other animals in the vicinity of treated areas. Camden recognizes that all citizens, particularly children, have a right to protection from exposure to hazardous chemicals and pesticides.”

Given out by EPA since 1970, the merit awards honor individuals and groups who have shown particular ingenuity and commitment in their efforts to preserve the region’s environment. This year’s competition drew approximately 49 nominations from across New England. Besides Citizens for a Green Camden, three other awards were given in Maine. The winners were among 31 from across New England. Awards were given in the categories of individual; business (including professional organizations); local, state or federal government; and environmental, community, academia or nonprofit organization.

Eliminating toxic pesticides is important in lawn and landscape management, considering that of the 30 most commonly used lawn pesticides: 14 are probable or possible carcinogens, 13 are linked with birth defects, 21 with reproductive effects, 15 with neurotoxicity, 26 with liver or kidney damage, and 27 are sensitizers and/or irritants. The most popular and widely used lawn chemical 2,4-D, which kills broad leaf weeds like dandelions, is an endocrine disruptor with predicted human health risks ranging from changes in estrogen and testosterone levels, thyroid problems, prostate cancer and reproductive abnormalities. 2,4-D has also been linked to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Other lawn chemicals like glyphosate (RoundUp) have also been linked to serious adverse chronic effects in humans. Imidacloprid, another pesticide growing in popularity, has been implicated in bee toxicity and the recent Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) phenomena.

The easiest and safest solution is to avoid chemical use and exposure by using alternative, non-toxic management methods for species that can cause economic and health problems, being more tolerant of species that are solely a nuisance or aesthetically displeasing, and using organic products.

The passage of pesticide-free and pesticide reduction policies are very promising. Other examples include: New York State Parks; Chicago City Parks; 29 communities and townships in New Jersey; at least 17 cities in the Northwest covering more than 50 parks; and, numerous communities throughout Massachusetts, Maine and Connecticut. This is just the tip of the iceberg, as new policies and programs are continually being implemented by local and state government entities as well as schools and homeowner associations.

As recently as two years ago, WHO was criticized for promoting DDT as the answer for malaria control in Africa, leading activists to call for increased use of alternatives. DDT has been recognized as a significant human and environmental health risk, including increased risk of breast cancer a wealth of other health concerns, and have built up in waterways and, in particular, the arctic.

Now, ten projects, all part of the global program “Demonstrating and Scaling-up of sustainable Alternatives to DDT in Vector Management,” involving some 40 countries in Africa, the Eastern Mediterranean and Central Asia, are set to test non-chemical methods ranging from eliminating potential mosquito breeding sites and securing homes with mesh screens to deploying mosquito-repellent trees and fish that eat mosquito larvae.

The new projects follow a successful demonstration of alternatives to DDT in Mexico and Central America. There, pesticide-free techniques and management regimes have helped cut cases of malaria by over 60 percent.

The success of the five year-long pilot indicates that sustainable alternatives to DDT are emerging as cost effective solutions that may be applicable regionally and globally. The Integrated Vector Management (IVM) strategy promoted by the World Health Organization provides the framework to include these measures in combinations of interventions adapted to differing local circumstances. The initiatives come amid long-standing and growing concern over the use of DDT and evidence that in many countries there is increasing mosquito resistance to the pesticide.

However, concern over DDT is matched by concern over the global malaria burden in which close to 250 million cases a year result in over 880,000 deaths. Thus any reduction in the use of DDT or other residual pesticides must ensure the level of transmission interruption is, at least, maintained.

The international community has, under the Stockholm Convention, agreed to ban a ‘dirty dozen’ of persistent organic pollutants including, ultimately, DDT on environmental and health grounds. However, a specific and limited exemption was made for the use of DDT to control malaria, because it was recognized that in some situations adequate alternative control methods were not currently available.

The aim of the new projects, a major initiative of the Global Environment Facility with close to $40 million funding, being spearheaded by WHO and the UNEP, is to achieve a 30% cut in the application of DDT worldwide by 2014 and its total phase-out by the early 2020s, if not sooner, while staying on track to meet the malaria targets set by WHO.

Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary General and UNEP Executive Director which hosts the secretariat of the Stockholm Convention, said, “The new projects underline the determination of the international community to combat malaria while realizing a low, indeed zero DDT world.”

“Today we are calling time on a chemical rooted in the scientific knowledge and simplistic options of a previous age. In doing so, innovative solutions are being catalyzed and sustainable choices brought forward that meet the genuine health and environmental aspirations of a 21st century society”.

“WHO faces a double challenge – a commitment to the goal of drastically and sustainably reducing the burden of vector-borne diseases, in particular malaria, and at the same time a commitment to the goal of reducing reliance on DDT in disease vector control”, said Dr. Margaret Chan, WHO Director-General.

WHO sees these projects in the context of IVM which it promotes as the approach of choice to control transmission of malaria and other vector-borne diseases. A key element of IVM is a solid evidence base for the effectiveness of combinations of locally-adapted, cost-effective and sustainable vector-control methods. This approach will facilitate sustainable transition away from DDT.