(Beyond Pesticides, March 11, 2011) The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Agriculture unanimously approved a bill, Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011 (H.R. 872), on Wednesday, March 9 which would amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Clean Water Act (CWA) to eliminate provisions requiring pesticide applicators to obtain a permit to allow pesticides or their residues to enter waterways. The bill would effectively reverse a 2009 Sixth Circuit court decision which ruled that, under FIFRA and the CWA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must require such permits. A similar bill was introduced in the U.S. Senate last year. The 2009 court ruling came in the case National Cotton Council v. EPA. Prior to this case, EPA had deemed it unnecessary to require permits for pesticide applications near waterways. These previous regulations meant that, in instances where pesticides were applied directly to water to control pests such as mosquito larvae or aquatic weeds, or when pesticides were applied to control pests over or near water, applications were held to the much less stringent FIFRA standards. FIFRA, unlike the CWA, does not fully regulate or monitor water quality and the protection of aquatic ecosystems in […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 28, 2010) The European Union (EU) standing committee on Tuesday decided to allow a 0.1 percent contamination threshold for unauthorized Genetically Engineered (GE) products in animal feed imports that would change the bloc’s zero-tolerance attitude toward biotech food. The EU Commission and Parliament are expected to accept the rule by this summer. If the vote is allowed through by the European Parliament and Council, those shipments could contain GE seeds that are authorized in their home country but may not even have been tested in Europe. Greenpeace spokesperson Stefanie Hundsdorfer warned that the new rules are possibly the first of many concessions to come. “Setting a tolerance threshold, however low, is a sign that Europe is losing control over its own food production to please American exporters,” said Ms. Hundsdorfer. “The danger now is that EU countries come under pressure from the pro-GE lobby to also allow GE contamination in food products for direct human consumption.” According to industry, exporting states and the European Commission say the new concession is necessary to prevent supply disruptions, because the EU’s feed industry relies on imports for 80% of its needs, and the world’s largest suppliers””Argentina, the United States and […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 9, 2011) Last Friday the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced plans to allow the U.S. sugar beet industry to continue growing Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready,” genetically engineered (GE) sugar beets, despite the incompletion of an environmental impact statement (EIS). This comes one week after USDA decided to fully deregulate GE alfalfa seed, despite the risks it poses to both organic and conventional farmers. On Monday, Center for Food Safety, Beyond Pesticides, Sierra Club and Cornucopia Institute formally filed a 60-day notice of intent to sue the agency concerning its decision to allow unrestricted deregulation of GE alfalfa. The 60-day notice of intent to sue, filed February 7, 2011, officially notifies USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the groups’ intent to sue pursuant to the citizen suit provision of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), citing APHIS’ violation of Section 7 of the ESA in failing to ensure that the deregulation of GE alfalfa is not likely to jeopardize threatened or endangered species and their habitat. According to Section 7, APHIS must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to ensure that agency actions do not impact threatened or endangered species. The notice charges […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 1, 20011) On January 31, 2011, a coalition of organic companies and environmental organizations, including Beyond Pesticides, released an open letter and call to action on the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) January 27 decision to deregulate “RoundUp Ready” (glyphosa te-tolerant) genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa, allowing its unrestricted cultivation and threatening organic and non-GE conventional farmers. It sets a precedent for future deregulation of GE crops. The letter encourages individuals to write to President Obama opposing the decision and asking that the administration reconsider its position. Other signatories include upcoming National Pesticide Forum keynote Maria Rodale (CEO, Rodale, Inc. and author of Organic Manifesto), National Organic Coalition, Center for Food Safety, Organic Trade Association, Organic Valley, Stonyfield Farm, and more. The decision to deregulate GE alfalfa follows USDA’s completion of the court-mandated environmental impact statement (EIS). Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack called for “coexistence” among GE, organic and conventional non-GE farmers, despite the clear recognition in the EIS that GE contamination of organic and conventionally grown crops presents a huge problem. The EIS also fails to take into account the documented increase in herbicide-resistant “super weeds” that is requiring the use of highly toxic herbicide cocktails for […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 28, 2011) Environmental and public interest groups are extremely disappointed with the announcement late Thursday that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) plans to fully deregulate genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa seed, despite the risks it poses to both organic and conventional farmers. Among those upset with the announcement are the cosponsors of the original Organic Foods Productions Act, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Representative Peter DeFazio (D-OR), who have weighed in with their criticism of USDA’s decision. This decision follows the agency’s completion of the court-mandated environmental impact statement (EIS) for GE alfalfa. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack called for “coexistence” among GE, organic and conventional non-GE farmers, despite the clear recognition in the EIS that GE contamination of organic and conventionally grown crops presents a huge problem. The EIS also fails to take into account the documented increase in herbicide-resistant “super weeds” that is requiring the use of highly toxic herbicide cocktails for weed control on conventional farms. Likewise, USDA has not shown that contamination-free coexistence with deregulated GE alfalfa is likely or possible. “We’re disappointed with USDA’s decision and we will be back in court representing the interest of farmers, preservation of the environment, and […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 20, 2011) Beyond Pesticides and the National Organic Coalition (NOC) are encouraging their members to contact President Obama and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and tell them not to approve (or not deregulate) Monsanto’s “RoundUp Ready,” genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa, which contributes to genetic drift, superweeds, and the use of a hazardous herbicide glyphosate. In December, USDA completed its environmental impact statement (EIS) of GE alfalfa. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack has rejected the option to prohibit the planting (and continuing to regulate) GE Alfalfa, despite the clear recognition in the EIS that that GE contamination of organic and conventionally grown crops presents a huge problem. USDA released its 2,400 page EIS as required by a 2007 Federal District Court decision and upheld by both 2009 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and June 2010 U.S. Supreme Court rulings. The litigation was led by the Center for Food Safety, and joined by Beyond Pesticides, and other groups, including conventional and organic seed companies and producers. Three alternatives are considered during the preparation of the final EIS: 1) to maintain the RR alfalfa’s status as a regulated article; 2) to deregulate RR alfalfa; or 3) to deregulate RR […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 12, 2011) A Santa Cruz, California, organic herb grower has the right to sue neighboring farm for ‘pesticide drift’. This according to a California’s 6th District Court of Appeal in San Jose which upheld Jacobs Farm/Del Cabo’s right to sue the pesticide applicator, Western Farm Service, and let stand the $1 million damage award a jury handed Jacobs Farm two years ago. The ruling makes it clear that pesticide users can be held liable for pesticide drift. The decision is significant, agriculture and law experts say, because it strengthens the case for organic farmers or anyone else harmed by pesticides to seek legal recourse – even if the pesticide is legally applied. The county’s deputy agricultural commissioner, Lisa LeCoump, said the court decision against Western Farm Services changes the ground rules, making it clear that a sprayer can now be held liable even if no law is broken. While California state law restricts pesticides from being sprayed on neighboring properties, the law doesn’t deal specifically with pesticides that disperse into the air after application and end up someplace else. Attorneys for Western Farm Service argued that since the company had not run afoul of state law, Jacobs […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 6, 2011) On Monday, a coalition of farmworkers, community activists and environmental health organizations announced a lawsuit challenging the approval of the toxic fumigant methyl iodide for use on California’s strawberry fields, urging the new Governor Jerry Brown to reverse the decision. The groups also submitted comments from over 52,000 members of the public urging Gov. Brown to act quickly to prevent the use of methyl iodide in California’s fields. The lawsuit was filed late last week by Earthjustice and California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc. on behalf of Pesticide Action Network North America, United Farm Workers of America, Californians for Pesticide Reform, Pesticide Watch Education Fund, Worksafe, Communities and Children Advocates Against Pesticide Poisoning and farmworkers Jose Hidalgo Ramon and Zeferino Estrada. The suit challenges the state Department of Pesticide Regulation’s (DPR) December 20 approval of methyl iodide for use in California on the grounds that it violates the California Environmental Quality Act, the California Birth Defects Prevention Act, and the Pesticide Contamination Prevention Act that protects groundwater against pesticide pollution. In addition, the suit contends that DPR violated the law requiring involvement of the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) in the development of farmworker […]

(Beyond Pesticides, December 17, 2010) Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack disappointed organic farmers and consumers, as well as environmentalists when he announced December 16, 2010 that the U.S. Department of Agriculture was considering “deregulating” a genetically engineered crop that is tied to genetic drift, superweeds, and the use of a hazardous pesticide -Monsanto’s genetically-engineered (GE) Roundup (glyphosate) Ready (RR) alfalfa. The Department released a 2,400 page Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) as required by a 2007 Federal District Court decision and upheld by both 2009 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and June 2010 U.S. Supreme Court rulings. The litigation was led by the Center for Food Safety, and joined by Beyond Pesticides, and other groups, including organic seed companies and producers. A broad coalition of groups has previously called for USDA to deny approval of Monsanto’s genetically engineered, Roundup Ready alfalfa (GE alfalfa). In March, more than 200,000 people submitted comments to USDA critiquing the substance and conclusions of its Draft EIS on GE Alfalfa. In addition, more than 300 public interest organizations, farmers, dairies, retailers and organic food producers from the U.S. and Canada delivered a critical letter to USDA. U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), […]

(Beyond Pesticides, December 16, 2010)The Center for Biological Diversity notified the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) December 15 of its intent to sue the agencies for failing to study and act on threats posed by more than 60 pesticides to the threatened California red-legged frog. A 2006 legal settlement secured by the Center required the EPA to assess the impacts of pesticides on the frog, then consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under the Endangered Species Act to address those impacts, by 2009. The completed assessments were submitted to the Wildlife Service between March 2007 and October 2009. Although EPA determined that 64 registered pesticides are likely to harm the frogs, the Service has not completed any consultations or adopted protective measures. “The EPA acknowledges that scores of pesticides may be dangerous to California’s rare red-legged frogs, but nothing’s been done about it,” said Jeff Miller, a conservation advocate with the Center. “This three-year delay violates the Endangered Species Act and jeopardizes the future of the largest native frog in California.” Historically abundant throughout California, red-legged frogs have declined in numbers over 90 percent and have disappeared from 70 percent […]

(Beyond Pesticides, December 14, 2010) A petition of more than a million signatures was presented to the European Commission last week, demanding a halt to approvals of new genetically modified (GM) crops and the establishment of up a new scientific body to study the impact of the technology and determine regulations. Greenpeace led the effort. The petition is seen as a test case for the “European citizen’s initiative,” introduced under the European Union’s new constitutional treaty, which enables a million or more people to jointly ask the European Commission to change EU legislation. It follows the Commission’s decision in March to grant the first EU GM cultivation approval in 12 years for the “Amflora” potato. “Over a million people across Europe have set the EU a democratic test — will the EU address the real concern people have about GM crops and food, or will it side with the chemical industry lobbyists controlling GM technology?” Greenpeace’s EU Director Jorgo Riss said. “Until safety issues of GMs are examined by independent experts, all GM authorizations should stop.” A spokesman for the EU executive said it would treat the signatures “as a petition in the spirit of the citizen’s initiative,” Despite the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 15, 2010) Reversing previous rulings that claimed that the toxic pesticide endosulfan was “safe,” the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) announced its decision Tuesday to finally cancel the registration of the highly hazardous chemical. Recent assessments by the Australian government’s Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPC) concluded that the prolonged use of endosulfan is likely to lead to adverse environmental effects via spray drift and run-off, and that these long-term risks could not be mitigated merely through use restrictions or label changes. Australia joins over 60 countries, including to the U.S. to have banned endosulfan. Endosulfan is an organochlorine insecticide that was first registered for use in the U.S. in the 1950s. It is an endocrine disruptor and exposure in male children may delay sexual maturity and interfere with sex hormone synthesis. Endosulfan also decreases semen quality, sperm count, spermatogonial cells, and sperm morphology, and contributes to other defects in male sex hormones. It is volatile, persistent, and has a high potential to bio-accumulate in aquatic and terrestrial organisms. Two-headed bass, for example, were found in the Noosa River resulting from surrounding pesticide drift from neighboring farms in Queensland, Australia. The pesticides, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 12, 2010) In an effort to reduce confusion among consumers trying to decipher the wide variety of green claims, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is revising its “Green Guides,” guidelines for companies seeking to promote their products as environmentally friendly. As consumers have become more aware of the environmental effects of the products they use, “green” marketing claims have become more prevalent. When a product carries the organic label, consumers can be confident that it has met strict standards and was certified by an independent organization, but many other labels are simply attempts at “green washing” conventional products to charge a premium to environmentally conscience consumers. Market research has shown that consumers often misunderstand the intentions of some green claims. Some labels make claims that are too broad and difficult to quantify. The revised guidelines advise producers not to make such broad claims on labels such as “environmentally friendly,” because according to an FTC consumer perception study, consumers often assume the product has far reaching environmental benefits. “What companies think green claims mean and what consumers really understand are sometimes two different things,” said FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz. The proposed guidelines are also intended to clarify claims […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 7, 2010) Nanotechnology has played an increasing role in the world of pesticides, particularly in the form of silver nanoparticles for their antibacterial properties; however, as this field grows, scientists and researchers are becoming increasingly concerned with the potential impacts of these particles on public health and the environment. A new study by scientists from Oregon State University (OSU) and the European Union (EU) highlights the major regulatory and educational issues that they believe should be considered before nanoparticles are used in pesticides. The study was published Monday in the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health. “Unlike some other applications of nanotechnology, which are further along in development, applications for pesticides are in their infancy,” said Dr. Stacey Harper, PhD, an assistant professor of nanotoxicology at Oregon State University. “There are risks and a lot of uncertainties, however, so we need to understand exactly what’s going on, what a particular nanoparticle might do, and work to eliminate use of any that do pose dangers. Some of the potential benefits of nanotechnology that scientists discuss in the report are that it may provide better control and delivery of active ingredients, less environmental drift, formulations that will most […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 6, 2010) Organic and genetically modified organism (GMO)-free conventional farmers and food processors need legal certainty that they can continue to produce food free of GMO contamination. This, according to the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM)— EU Regional Group, which responded to a presentation by EU Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection John Dalli on “best practice document” for genetically modified (GM) maize. The best practice document outlines voluntary guidelines for the coexistence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming, but fails to address the economic and social impacts on contaminated non-GMO farms. Commissioner Dalli presented to the Farm Council proposals on GMO cultivation, as well as a new “best practice document” for maize. “Commissioner Dalli is trying to snake his way through crucial GMO policies by attempting to satisfy all conflicting parties with his proposals to the Farm Council this morning. But his approach still fails to solve the main problems,” comments Christopher Stopes, President of the IFOAM EU Group. “Consumers refuse to eat GMOs which is their democratic right.” The best practice document authored by the European Coexistence Bureau, developed in light of a July 2010 recommendation, reflects the possibility for […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 1, 2010) A new study by University of Notre Dame ecologist Jennifer Tank, PhD and colleagues reveals that streams throughout the Midwest are contaminated with transgenic materials from corn crop byproducts, even six months after harvest. The transgenic corn has been genetically engineered (GE) to produce its own insecticide, a toxin from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). In a 2007 paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS), Dr. Tank and a group of researchers demonstrated that transgenic materials from corn (pollen, leaves, cobs) do, in fact, enter streams and can be subsequently transported to downstream water bodies. In a paper, “Occurrence of maize detritus and a transgenic insecticidal protein (Cry1Ab) within the stream network of an agricultural landscape,” published in the September 27, 2010 edition of PNAS, the researchers write about their nvestigation of the fate and persistence of the material and its associated Cry1Ab insecticidal protein, using a synoptic field survey of 217 stream sites in northwestern Indiana six months after crop harvest. “We found that corn crop byproducts were common in agricultural streams and that 86 percent of sites contained corn leaves, cobs, husks and/or stalks in the active stream […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 27, 2010) The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) has awarded $180,000 in federal funds to a trade associated group that will “correct the misconception that some fresh produce items contain excessive amounts of pesticide residues.” The group, Alliance for Food and Farming, specifically says in its abstract on CDFA’s press release that it will use the grant to counter “claims by activist groups about unsafe levels of pesticides”¦ and “change public perception about the safety of produce when it comes to pesticide residues.” Marilyn Dolan, the executive director of the Alliance told California Watch “We really want to emphasize that we are not about discouraging information. ”¦We are about encouraging consumption of all fruits and vegetables — both organic and conventional.” However, the Alliance has criticized the “Dirty Dozen” project by the organization Environmental Working Group (EWG), contending that there is “no scientific evidence” that a small amount of pesticide residue on food “represents any health risk.” Last July, the Alliance even set up a web site and press webinar claiming that the “Dirty Dozen” list is dangerous to the public health. Food residues are only a small part of the problem with conventional farming, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 9, 2010) Researchers at the University of Arizona have examined the reasons for the higher cost of organic produce and predict the price will soon decrease. Many consumers would like to purchase more organic produce, but chose conventional due to the lower costs. Organic agriculture is the fastest growing sector of U.S. agriculture, and despite premium prices, organic food sales grew 53% from 2005 to 2008. Organic agriculture embodies an ecological approach to farming that does not rely on or permit synthetic 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. The study, entitled “Resale and Wholesale Market Power in Organic Apples,” examined organic apples grown in Washington State to serve as an example for overall organic agricultural production and sales. Washington State supplies 70% of U.S. apples. The demand for organic agriculture continues to grow due to the benefits to human health and the environment. In addition to the many organic food stores, most large grocery stores across the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 8, 2010) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has received a new Biological Opinion from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) with a finding that the application of products containing any of 12 organophosphate (OP) pesticides are likely to jeopardize federally listed threatened or endangered Pacific salmon and steelhead and their designated critical habitat. The 12 OPs addressed in this Biological Opinion, issued under the Endangered Species Act, are azinphos-methyl, bensulide, dimethoate, disulfoton, ethoprop, fenamiphos, methamidophos, methidathion, methyl parathion, naled, phorate, and phosmet. This opinion concludes that EPA’s registration of pesticides containing bensulide, dimethoate, ethoprop, methidathion, naled, phorate, and phosmet are each likely to jeopardize the continued existence of one or more of the 28 endangered and threatened Pacific salmonids and are each likely to destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat for one or more of the 28 threatened and endangered salmonids. NMFS reached this conclusion because predicted concentrations of these seven pesticides in salmonid habitats, particularly in floodplain habitats, are likely to cause adverse effects to at least one listed Pacific salmonids including significant reductions in growth or survival. EPA’s registration of bensulide, dimethoate, ethoprop, methidathion, naled, phorate, and phosmet is also likely to result […]

(Beyond Pesticides, Aug 16, 2010) A recently released study conducted by the National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences shows government agencies may be underestimating children’s dietary exposure to pesticides and, therefore, the inherent risks to children’s health. The study, “Assessing Children’s Dietary Pesticide Exposure- Direct measurement of Pesticide Residues in 24-Hour Duplicate Food Samples” lead by Dr. Chensheng Lu, examines the pesticide residues in foods consumed by children in a study group and builds on a previous study published in 2008 entitled “Dietary Intake and Its Contribution to Logitudinal Organophosphorus Pesticide Exposure in Urban/Suburban Children.” The 2008 study examined the concentrations of organophosphate pesticides in the bodies of children who consumed a diet of conventional produce and then switched to a diet of organic produce. The study examined two groups of 23 children ranging in age from 3 to 11, in Seattle, Washington and Atlanta, Georgia. Researchers measured the concentrations of malathion, chlorpyrifos, and other organophosphate pesticide metabolites in the children’s urine. These pesticides have no residential uses, and because all children in the study group live in urban or suburban areas, researchers assumed that all exposure to these pesticides were the result of diet. The children were then fed […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 12, 2010) In an effort to convince NStar Electric and Gas Corporation to stop using herbicides on rights-of-way, like-minded environmental activists, citizen groups and business owners formed a coalition on Cape Cod: “Cape Cod for a Truly Green NSTAR.” Due to the increased pressure from local activists and residents, NStar made an agreement with regionally planning authority, Cape Cod Commission to postpone the use of herbicides on rights-of-way until 2011. The Commission reasoned that with more time, Cape towns could develop maps to identify areas and drinking water supplies more sensitive to herbicide use. Several organizations and business have signed on to the coalition in support of a ban on herbicides along rights-of-way, such as Clean Water Action, Cape Cod Organic Gardeners, the Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition, and the Sierra Club (see the full list online). Ever since NStar started using herbicides in 2004, local residents have worried about potential contamination of the Cape’s underground drinking water supply. Even though NStar has a “green” commitment statement on its website, pledging to lessen impacts to the environment as much as possible, the coalition argues that the company’s use of herbicides on rights-of-way violates this promise. NStar representative Michael […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 5, 2010) A 400-year old large old grape vine considered to be the nation’s oldest in Manteo, North Carolina and known lovingly as “Mother Vine,” is slowly recovering from a powerful dose of herbicide sprayed by a utility company. The Virginia-based Dominion Power Company contracted Lewis Tree Service to spray power poles along the roads in the Manteo in May. The herbicide they used, Garlon3A, was accidentally sprayed on a tiny shoot from the vine that had grown a few feet up a pole on 84-year old Jack Wilson’s property. Unaware of the recent herbicide spraying by the utility power company, he noticed various brown, dead sections that began to appear in the plant in May. Not only did the vine suffer, but about 10 feet of a nearby hedge died, along with three limbs of a large pecan tree that had to be trimmed. The active ingredient in Garlon 3A, a Dow Chemical product, is triclopyr. It is a systemic herbicide which means that the poison spreads from the ends of the vine back toward the root. As a broadleaf weed killer, triclopyr is frequently used along rights-of-way and on industrial sites. In laboratory tests, triclopyr […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 27, 2010) Groups filed a lawsuit in federal court to force the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to decide whether or not it will cancel all remaining uses and tolerances for the pesticide chlorpyrifos, which has been banned for residential use, but continues to expose farmworkers and consumers through its use in agriculture. In September 2007, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) filed a petition with EPA asking the agency to ban chlorpyrifos. In the nearly three years since, the agency has not responded. NRDC and PANNA v. EPA, filed by the nonprofit environmental law firm Earthjustice on July 22, 2010, would force EPA to make a decision on the pesticide’s ban. “This dangerous pesticide has no place in our fields, near our children, or on our food,” said Earthjustice attorney Kevin Regan. “We’re asking a court to rule so that EPA will finish the job and ban this poison.” According to Beyond Pesticides, EPA’s 2000 negotiated settlement with Dow AgroSciences, which allows the highest volume chlorpyrifos uses to continue, represents a classic failure of the risk assessment process (including the so-called cumulative risk assessment which accounts for all chemicals with […]