(Beyond Pesticides, March 7, 2008) A number of counties in California’s Bay Area have voiced strong opposition to state plans to aerially spray a pheromone mixture over areas where the light brown apple moth (LBAM) has been found. While the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) plans to begin spraying this summer, state legislators and county officials alike are taking steps to postpone or halt it completely.

By late February, Senator Carole Midgen had introduced a resolution to set a moratorium on aerial spraying in San Francisco and Marin counties. Assemblyman John Laird and others introduced a four-bill legislative package designed to ensure CDFA is “adequately prepared” for pest problems and public health is protected.

Since then, a number of city councils have approved a variety of resolutions to oppose aerial spraying. Santa Cruz County has filed a lawsuit to stop the spraying, the court hearing for which has been postponed until April 24 in order to complete paperwork. “The county just received the administrative record from the state,” said county spokeswoman Dinah Phillips. “We’ll be going through that with a fine-tooth comb. We’re trying to get everything ready before the spraying begins.”

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors has signed on to Sen. Midgen’s resolution. “We haven’t seen this level of concern and debate since the medfly days of then Governor Jerry Brown,” said Sup. Ross Mirkarimi.

The Berkeley City Council notified the Secretary of Agriculture, during a presentation on the planned spraying, that it is planning a lawsuit, or to collaborate with other Bay Area counties on one. The Oakland City Council likewise unanimously approved a resolution to oppose spraying until a “reliable outside independent source verifies that there are no health effects.” According to Councilwoman Jane Brunner, “People are very pleased that we took such fast action.”

Even in Fairfax, where state officials have no plans to aerially spray for LBAM, the City Council has voted to request a moratorium on spraying over the Tiburon peninsula. “We need to scream to the heavens on this issue,” said Councilman Lew Tremaine. “The government is declaring war on the people of this community. We need to make sure this doesn’t happen.” Mayor Mary Ann Maggiore worried that strong winds would bring the pheremone to Fairfax from other areas. “We have no idea how much this might drift,” she said. “We’re strongly against pesticides here.”

CDFA is still accepting comments on its Environmental Impact Report. You can send yours in through March 14. Address your comments to Jim Rains, Staff Environmental Scientist, California Department of Food and Agriculture, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, fax (916) 654-1018, or email [email protected].

The LBAM issue will be addressed next week at the National Pesticide Forum, held at the University of California-Berkeley. A Saturday workshop, “Taking the Lead at the Local Level,” will feature an informative presentation by Paul Schramski, state director of Pesticide Watch, followed by an informal discussion session on Sunday. For more details and to register for the Forum, click here.

Sources: Santa Cruz Sentinel, Oakland Tribune, San Francisco Bay Guardian, Salinas Californian, Marin Independent Journal

(Beyond Pesticides, March 6, 2008) The public is invited to a screening of the remarkable Rachel Carson film, A Sense of Wonder, opening at the D.C. Environmental film festival, March 12th at 7 pm at E Street Cinema in Washington, D.C. The film was shot last fall at Miss Carson’s cottage in Maine and is adapted from the one-person play of the same name. Bill Moyers of PBS said of the play, “I was deeply moved by Kauilani Lee’s incarnation of Rachel Carson in A Sense of Wonder. You cannot watch. . .without reflecting on universal themes – life death, the power of place, courage in growing old and speaking truth. You cannot walk away unmoved.”

The film should have a great life spreading Miss Carson’s vital and timely words. The actress Kaiulani Lee with director Christopher Monger and co-producer Karen Montgomery bring Ms. Lee’s play based on the life and writings of environmentalist Rachel Carson to the silver screen. Ms. Lee will perform the play at the upcoming 26th National Pesticide Forum, Reclaiming Our Healthy Future, March 14, 7:30pm at the Clark Kerr Conference Center at the University of California, Berkeley. For directions, details on the film or general festival information, visit the film festival website. View the film trailer here.

About the film
A Sense of Wonder (USA, 2008, 54 min.) Based on the life and writings of environmentalist Rachel Carson, this film tells the story of a woman’s love for the natural world and her fight to defend it. Rachel Carson was thrust into controversy with the 1962 publication of her book, Silent Spring, which alerted the world to the dangers of chemical pesticides and launched the modern environmental movement.In this film, acclaimed actress Kaiulani Lee portrays Miss Carson during the last year of her life. Shot on location in Carson’s cabin on the Maine coast, the first scene takes place as she is preparing to leave her summer home. Fighting cancer, she fears this may well be her last visit to her beloved Maine.

The second scene takes place two months later in her winter home outside of Washington, D.C. where her life is embroiled in the furor over her book, Silent Spring. Miss Carson is simultaneously battling the chemical industry, the government, the press and her continuing illness to get her message to Congress and the American people. Recalling the arduous but triumphant process that resulted in Silent Spring, she recounts with humor and some anger the attacks on her by the chemical industry and the film concludes with a moving and inspiring recitation by Miss Carson that summarizes her environmental worldview.

This film, screened in high definition, is based on Kaiulani Lee’s critically acclaimed one-woman play of the same name, written with the help and guidance of many of Miss Carson’s friends and colleagues. Directed by Christopher Monger and produced by Karen Montgomery. Director of Photography: Haskell Wexler.

Introduced by Flo Stone, President & Founder, Environmental Film Festival in the Nation’s Capital. Discussion with actress Kaiulani Lee follows screening.

Ticket/Reservation Info:

Tickets, $10, available at E Street Cinema Box office beginning Feb. 15.
E Street Cinema, 555 11th St., NW (entrance on E St. between 10th & 11th Sts.)
(METRO: Metro Center). Get tickets in advance. Seating limited.

For information on the Berkeley, CA performance of A Sense of Wonder, contact Beyond Pesticides, 202-543-5450, or go to Beyond Pesticides’ conference webpage.

The film will be available soon for public distribution. If you are interested in purchasing a copy of the DVD, please contact Beyond Pesticides at [email protected].

“Those who dwell among the beauties and mysteries of the Earth are never alone or weary of life.” – Rachel Carson

(Beyond Pesticides, March 5, 2008) The state of Minnesota will this week make a decision on a bill that would create a public database of all pesticides applied in the state. The bill would also require farmers and commercial applicators to notify neighbors before using restricted pesticides that are volatile.

Democratic Rep. Ken Tschumper of La Crescent, author of the bill, Pesticide Right to Know, believes that the public has a right to know what chemicals are being used in their neighborhoods. The bill will require pesticide applicators to give 48 hours advance notification to an area where pesticides will be sprayed, both in urban and rural areas, and what kind of pesticide would be used. The legislation also calls for the Minnesota Department of Agriculture to create an Internet database indicating the time and location of pesticide application. Under the measure, pesticide applicators would have to report to the Agriculture Department every 30 days.

“The bill is not that onerous. Pesticide applicators have to keep track of every application of pesticide they do,” Rep. Tschumper said. “All we’re simply saying is that data, that information, needs to be made public.”

Using volatile chemicals such as atrazine, which is widely used in Minnesota and travels great distances with the wind, would require advance notification by the farmer. Spray drift is currently illegal in Minnesota.

“The applicators have to give some sort of advanced notice — like a day or two ahead of time when they’re going to apply these pesticides, so that the public can be aware of that and protect themselves if there is spray drift, for example,” Rep. Tschumper said.
More than 200 pesticides are bought and sold in Minnesota and farmers and other applicators have to keep track of every application. Current laws state that applicators only have to release information when it is requested from state agriculture officials, a medical doctor or veterinarian. The state, however, does not track how or when these chemicals are used.

Rep. Al Juhnke (DFL-Willmar), who leads a House agriculture funding committee, said he is opposed to the pesticide bill. Rep. Junke says he is concerned the legislation would impinge on the privacy rights of pesticide applicators and farmers. “People are private. We don’t want our information, our name, address, given out to just anyone,” Rep. Juhnke said, adding the information already is available to agriculture officials and health caregivers. “Beyond that, I’m hard pressed to understand why we’d want to do this, other than to appease some anti-chemical activists.”

Farmers opposing the bill say notifying neighbors 48 hours in advance would be too difficult. Some are concerned about their customer data becoming public. “My competitors could go online, find who my customers are and contact them, try to make them deals and sway them away from me,” farmer, Ken Peterson said. “They can find out what mixtures I’m using that work better on certain things, and, you know, it would be like giving up trade secrets.”

This bill has bounced around the state Legislature for years, but Rep. Tschumper says support for it has grown this year. The Environment and Natural Resources Committee is set to take up the bill this week.

Minnesota is not alone in wanting pesticide disclosure and consumer notification. Recently the District of Columbia took up the issue of reforming pesticide law by proposing an amendment that requires licensed pesticide applicators to provide hazard information to potential customers. Beyond Pesticides testified in support of expanding this bill to ensure that people are fully warned before purchasing pest control services or pesticide products. The amendment bill also addressed the issue of inadequately trained commercial applicators. (See Daily News of January 17, 2008.)

Source: Minnesota Public Radio

(Beyond Pesticides, March 4, 2008) Concern about environmental health and justice has exploded in our communities and around the world as a political and moral issue. One of the central threats, toxic pesticides, is directly linked to adverse health effects, particularly in children, and poisoning of the environment. We have learned enough in the last several decades since the publication of Silent Spring to make dramatic shifts away from toxic chemical dependency — as science increasingly links exposure to disease; insect, plant and bacteria resistance to chemicals multiplies; the energy and carbon footprint associated with pesticide use is documented; and the viability of sound and safe practices is realized.

While the shift away from pesticide dependency has begun to take hold in communities around the world, conventional chemical intensive practices in agriculture and residential and institutional management continue to pose unjustifiable and unwarranted hazards. Regulatory standards and underlying laws accept unnecessary risks for workers that handle and work around pesticides and children who eat treated food, breathe contaminated air, or touch toxic surfaces.

Studies link pesticides to cancer and immune, reproductive and nervous system damage. Subtle low level exposure effects that cause learning disabilities or impede brain function defy classical dose-makes-the-poison theory and show elevated effect at lower doses. Reclaiming Our Healthy Future: Political change to protect the next generation is intended to hone our knowledge of the latest science and real world experiences from around the world to inform our activism as effective agents to protect health and the environment, today and for the next generation. We will share experiences and models that have met with success, as well as challenges that must be overcome. The program’s issue and strategy discussions cut across topics affecting the health of children, workers, families, and communities; justice for those most affected by pesticides; and a food system that protects, rather than threatens, the sustainability of the planet.

The Forum is an opportunity to develop new strategies for restructuring our approaches to eliminating toxic chemicals in the management of land, agriculture, and buildings. We begin the Forum with the inspiration and words of Rachel Carson, leading us to renew our energy in the fight against chemicals that destroy the very natural environment that we depend on for life. We do this with a sense of urgency and a spirit of resolve that solutions are within our grasp. — Jay Feldman, Beyond Pesticides; Kathryn Gilje, PANNA; David Chatfield, CPRReclaiming Our Healthy Future: Political change to protect the next generation, the 26th National Pesticide Forum will be held March 14-16 at the University of California Berkeley Clark Kerr Conference Center. The full program is now available online. For full details and registration, visit the forum web page.

(Beyond Pesticides, March 3, 2008) In a five-year study of the Chesapeake Bay, the nation’s largest estuary, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 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.“ The report finds that concentrations of DDT, while still present, have declined since the 1970s when it was phased out. The findings are contained in a report entitled Synthesis of U.S. Geological Survey Science for the Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem and Implications for Environmental Management. The study is a part of the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP), which is a multi-agency partnership working to restore the Bay ecosystem. According to the report introduction, “In 2005, which represented the mid-point of the Chesapeake 2000 agreement, there was growing concern at all levels of government and by the public that ecological conditions in the Bay and its watershed had not significantly improved. The slow rate of improvement, coupled with the projected human-population increase in the Bay watershed, implied that many desired ecological conditions will not be achieved by 2010. The Government Accountability Office (2005) recommended that the CBP complete efforts for an integrated assessment approach of ecosystem conditions and develop a comprehensive, coordinated implementation strategy. To address these challenges, the CBP partners are writing a strategic implementation plan (SIP) to more accurately define the degree to which restoration goals can be achieved by 2010, and the most effective approach to achieve the goals. The USGS findings and their implications provide critical information that will be used by the CBP partners to prepare the SIP and develop improved management strategies. A major CBP restoration goal is to “Have a “toxics free“ Bay to improve conditions for aquatic-dependent wildlife.“ As a part of this effort, the study seeks to define the occurrence of contaminants in the Bay watershed. Some of the findings include:

Two year earlier, according to Water Quality in the Nation’s Streams and Aquifers-Overview of Selected Findings, 1991-2001, released in 2004 as a compendium of 51 USGS reports on the health of major river basins across the country, insecticides such as diazinon and malathion were found in nearly all of the streams that were sampled in urban areas. Streams in agricultural areas were more likely to contain herbicides-especially atrazine, metolachlor, alachlor, and cyanazine. A summary of the findings were reported in Beyond Pesticides’ Daily News Blog.

(Beyond Pesticides, February 29, 2008) The National Park Service (NPS) recently released a report documenting airborne pesticides.  The report of the  Western Airborne Contaminants Assessment Project (WACAP), with data collected from 2002 to 2007, found high concentrations of “numerous” airborne contaminants, including current and former use pesticides. Contamination is widespread throughout twenty parks throughout the western United States and Alaska, exceeding consumption levels for humans and wildlife in some areas.

According to the report, the contaminants of second and third “highest concern” are “Dieldrin – an acutely toxic insecticide banned from use in the U.S. since 1987 that decreases the effectiveness of the immune system” and “DDT – an insecticide banned in the U.S. since 1972 that reduces reproductive success.”

NPS also reported that Dieldrin and DDT levels exceeded the threshold for recreational fishermen in several parks, and Dieldrin levels exceeded that for subsistence fishermen in all but Olympic National Park. Fish-eating birds are also at risk in some parks. While NPS could not establish a correlation between contaminant levels and fish reproductive effects due to small sample size, two parks produced individual “intersex” fish. However, NPS stated, “This condition is commonly associated with exposure to certain contaminants (e.g., dieldrin and DDT) that mimic the hormone estrogen.”

NPS reported that the sources of this extensive contamination are widespread, both locally and globally. It announced, “Evidence suggests that the contaminants found in this study are carried in air masses from sources as far away as Europe and Asia, and as near as the local country. According to Landers, the presence of contaminants in snow is well-correlated with the proximity of each park to agricultural areas, pointing to these areas as probable major sources of these contaminants. In Alaska Parks, with little nearby agriculture in the region, there are very low concentrations of most current-use compounds. However, concentrations of historic-use chemicals in Alaska systems are similar to those in other parks sampled, suggesting greater influence from global atmospheric transport.”

According to report co-author Michael Kent, “Contaminants are everywhere. You can’t get more remote than these northern parts of Alaska and the high Rockies.” They have also not been reduced with the bans of DDT and dieldrin; newer chemicals are persisting in measurable quantities. University of Washington researcher Daniel Jaffe said, “We replaced [DDT and dieldrin] with pesticides with much shorter lifetimes in the environment. But in places like the Central Valley of California, we are applying many, many tons of these every year. We now know they can move substantial distances.”

Sources: National Park Service, Associated Press

(Beyond Pesticides, February 28, 2008) Earthworms studied in agricultural fields have been found to contain chemicals from household products (including the widely marketed triclosan, a hazardous antimicrobial) and manure, indicating that such substances are entering the food chain. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Scientists and their colleague from Colorado State University at Pueblo published their findings in Environmental Science and Technology. The study results demonstrate that organic chemicals introduced to the environment via land application of biosolids, the solid byproduct of wastewater treatment, and manure as fertilizers are transferred to earthworms. Earthworms continuously ingest soils for nourishment and can accumulate the chemicals present in the soil.The scientists collected soil and earthworms from three agricultural fields””a soybean field fertilized with biosolids, a corn field fertilized with swine manure, and a soybean field that had received no applications of either biosolids or manure for at least 7 years.

The chemicals investigated are considered indicators of human and animal waste sources and include a range of active ingredients in common household products such as detergents, antibacterial soaps, fragrances, and pharmaceuticals. All of these chemicals tend to be concentrated in the municipal waste distribution and disposal process and are referred to as anthropogenic waste indicators (AWI).

Scientists found 28 AWIs in biosolids being applied at a soybean field for the first time and 20 AWIs in earthworms from the same field. Similar results were found for the field where swine manure was applied. Several compounds were detected in earthworms collected both from the biosolids- and manure-applied fields, including phenol (disinfectant), tributylphosphate (antifoaming agent and flame retardant), benzophenone (fixative), trimethoprim (antibiotic), and the synthetic fragrances galaxolide, and tonalide. Detergent metabolites and the disinfectant triclosan were found in earthworms from the biosolids-applied field, but not the manure-applied field. Earthworms from the control field (no recent application of biosolids or manure) contained detections of some of the same compounds, indicating potential persistence in the environment or another source.

In published studies, triclosan has been linked to skin irritations, allergy susceptibility, depression of the central nervous system, bacterial and compounded antibiotic resistance, and dioxin contamination as well as the destruction of fragile aquatic ecosystems. It has also been found in plasma and breast milk of nursing mothers and in urinary samples of three out of four individuals tested.

Biosolids are made from the sludge generated by the treatment of sewage at wastewater treatment plants. Biosolids are used as fertilizer by farmers, landscapers, and homeowners when it meets U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (http://www.epa.gov/OWM/mtb/biosolids/index.htm) and local regulations for nutrient, metal, and pathogen content. About half of the 8 million dry tons of biosolids produced in the U. S. each year are applied to the land. Biosolids have been found to be rich in AWIs compared to levels in wastewater treatment plant effluent. Triclosan cannot be removed from wastewater by conventional treatment processes.

The USGS results build upon a 2006 study that found 25 household chemicals in every biosolid sample collected including compounds that are pharmaceutically and hormonally active, such as such as triclosan, a musk fragrance (tonalide), an antihistamine (diphenhydramine), and an antiepileptic drug (carbamazepine).

When used outside of health care settings, triclosan is unnecessary, and constant exposure to triclosan becomes a health and environmental hazard. The best solution to preventing infections is plain soap and water.

Source: USGS Toxic Substances Hydrology Program

(Beyond Pesticides, February 27, 2008) EPA is seeking public comments on a proposed list of 104 possible drinking water contaminants that may need to be regulated in the future to ensure the continued protection of drinking water. Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA includes on the draft Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) currently unregulated contaminants that are known or anticipated to occur in public water systems and which may require regulation. This draft CCL, which is the third such listing, lists 93 chemical contaminants or groups and 11 microbes, and describes the process and basis for selecting these contaminants.“EPA is casting a broader scientific net for potential regulation of chemicals and microbes in drinking water,” said Assistant Administrator for Water Benjamin H. Grumbles. “EPA’s proposed list of priority contaminants will advance sound science and public health by targeting research on certain chemicals and microbes and informing regulators on how best to reduce risk.”

(Beyond Pesticides, February 26, 2008) The United Farm Workers of America, Beyond Pesticides and others, represented by lawyers from Earthjustice, argued in federal court that the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) decision to allow the use of azinphos-methyl until 2012 was unconscionable. The plaintiffs say EPA did not consider harm to farmworkers and their families, or to rivers, lakes and salmon, and the agency should be forced to reconsider.

“There are workers getting sick,” Patti Goldman, a lawyer for Earthjustice, told U.S. District Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. “This isn’t just hypothetical. There are workers being taken out of the field.”The AP reports that Cynthia Morris, a Justice Department lawyer who argued on the agency’s behalf, told the judge that the short-term benefits of allowing growers to keep using AZM for the next several years outweigh the potential harm. She argued that the agency’s decision was reasonable, and failed to meet the “arbitrary and capricious” standard for the judge to undo it.In November 2006, EPA decided that AZM poses unreasonable adverse effects and must be banned but allowed its continued use on fruit crops for six more years — until 2012 — and on nut crops for three more years — until 2009. The plaintiffs contend this phase-out period is too long because of the immediate and severe risks it poses to farm workers and their families.AZM is a highly neurotoxic organophosphate insecticide. Organophosphate insecticides attack the human brain and nervous system. Exposure can cause dizziness, vomiting, convulsions, numbness in the limbs, loss of intellectual function, and death. New alternatives have emerged that cost only slightly more and produce the same amount and quality of food crops. Farmworker families and communities are exposed to organophosphates through take-home exposures on clothing, contamination of cars and drift onto outdoor play areas.

In 2001, EPA found that AZM poses unacceptable risks to workers, but it allowed continued use of the pesticide for four more years because less toxic alternatives cost more to use. Farmworker advocates challenged that decision in federal court because EPA failed to take into account the costs of poisoning workers, exposing children, and polluting rivers and streams. To settle the lawsuit, EPA agreed to reconsider whether to ban AZM and announced its six-year phase-out.

“With safer alternatives already in widespread use, EPA has betrayed the trust of the men, women, and children whose health it is duty bound to protect by allowing this extremely hazardous pesticide to remain in use for six more years,” said Shelley Davis, attorney for Farmworker Justice. “It is time to make that shift now.”

Judge Martinez said he would rule as soon as possible.

The groups bringing the lawsuit are the United Farm Workers of America, Sea Mar Community Health Centers, Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste, Beyond Pesticides, Frente Indígena Oaxaqueño Binacional, and Arnulfo Lopez, a farmworker in California.