PAN North America - Pesticide Action Network...PAN North America Magazine Spring 2007 news a global ban. The bill also threatened states’ rights with radical preemption of health-pro-tective

Pesticide Action Network North America • advancing alternatives to pesticides worldwide Spring 2007

PAN North AmericaPAN International, Land & Justice: The View from Brazil

Poisons on the Wind Drift Catching in Washington

Besting Pests with Mustard

PAN North America Contents

panna.org—news You Can UseAdditional resources for articles in the print version of this magazine, including detailed references and citations, are available in our online version. Look for the on the web ladybug at the end of articles.

other online resources:

Take ActionSubscribe to PAN Alert on panna.org and take action to promote alternatives, eliminate the worst pesticides, and protect us from environmental hazards.

Get Weekly NewsPANUPS are email news bulletins from our Pesticide Action Network Update Service. They provide a quick digest with links to full reports on pesticides, environmental health, and sustainable agriculture. Read or subscribe on our home page.

Pesticide DatabasePesticideinfo.org brings together a diverse array of pesticide toxicity and regulatory information. Search

by chemical or product. Includes extensive documentation and information about the data.

Have a pest problem?Click Pesticide Advisor on the homepage. It’s a one-stop guide to information on household and landscrape pest and pesticide problems. Topics include home, garden, pets, food, product information, and pesticide exposure.

PAN North America websiteExplore panna.org for extensive resources, learn about our network, and join our efforts. Features include daily news updates, in-depth reports, articles, databases, campaign fact sheets, videos, links and more.

Go to panna.org/magazine

NewsPAN Fights Renewed Push for DDT 2Morton Grove Bullies Its Opponents 2Last-ditch Effort to Pass GOP’s Bad POPs Bill Fails 3PAN Gathers for Global Strategy Meeting in Rio 5New Organophosphates Campaign Targets Chlorpyrifos 6Verdict in Basel: Syngenta Judged “Guilty!” 8

FeaturesDrift Catcher Training Draws Activists from Near and Far 10 PAN to EPA: Phase Out Fumigants 12Federal Scientists Protest White House Meddling 14Meeting Brazil’s Land-rights Heros 16 Poisons on the Wind: Drift Catching in Washington State 18

SolutionsSpread the News: Mustard Can Drive Away Pests 22Getting Your Fill at Full Belly Farm 26 The Non-Pesticide Advisor 29Help Yourself: Resources for a Better World 32

AffiliatesSaskatchewan Network for Alternatives to Pesticides 30Midwest Organic & Sustainable Education Services 31

Last WordSeeds of Hope in South Central LA 33

Volume II, Number 1 Spring 2007

49 Powell Street, #500San Francisco, CA 94102phone 1-415-981-1771fax [email protected] www.panna.org

a member of Earth Share

Cover: Abrazos in Brazil. Several members from three of PAN’s five regional networks take a break during the first meeting of PAN International in Rio de Janiero. Foreground (left to right): Elsa Nivia (Colombia) and Meriel Watts (New Zealand). Background: Carina Weber (Germany), Sarojeni Rengam (Malaysia), and Gilbert Sape (Malaysia). See stories on pages 5 and 16. Photo: Medha Chandra.

Printing: Autumn PressPrinted with soy-based ink on 100% post-consumer waste, processed chlorine free, recycled paper (cover 50% PCW)

A publication of Pesticide Action Network (PAN) North America, an international coalition advocating ecologically sound practices in place of pesticides. Established in 1982, PAN links more than 700 organizations in 100 countries, coordinated by five Regional Centers. In North America, PAN comprises more than 200 Affiliate groups in Canada, Mexico and the U.S.

Views expressed herein are the authors’ and do not necessarily represent those of PAN International or PAN North America. Permission granted to reproduce portions of this publication, provided the source (Pesticide Action Network North America) is acknowledged.

Executive Director: Kathryn Gilje

Editor: Gar Smith

Design: Brenda J. Willoughby

Contributors: Andrew Brait, Anna Marie Carter, Medha Chandra, Kathryn Gilje, Stephenie Hendricks, Brian Hill, Susan Kegley, Monica Moore, Harry Morse, Margaret Reeves, Kristin Schafer, Steve Scholl-Buckwald, Stephanie Schwartz, Pam Sherwood, Lori Ann Thrupp, Karl Tupper.

PAN North America Magazine Spring 2007 �

First Word This is a watershed year for PAN North America. PAN’s 25th anniversary year finds us facilitating community-based science and policy changes; organizing strategic networks to eliminate key deadly pesticides; promoting ecologically sound, socially just alternatives; and working more closely than ever with our international partners on issues ranging from DDT and malaria, to convincing governments and the UN to increase support for ecologically based agriculture—and so much more.

For my part, I am honored to have been named by the PAN North America board as the interim Executive Director as Monica Moore and Steve Scholl-Buckwald finish their 15-year partnership as co-directors and move into new roles in PAN’s advocacy and management.

Highlights from my first months as ED include a cozy banquet on the California coast with some 400 organic farmers and sustainable agriculture advocates at the annual Eco-Farm conference. We gathered to support and “push the envelope” in organic farming, by sharing field techniques, celebrating our core commitments, and honoring those whose hard work helps create food systems free from toxic pesticides. And I was there when PAN’s co-founder, Monica Moore, received the Ecological Farming Association’s Justie Award and a standing ovation, in recognition of PAN’s contributions to the promotion of social justice in agriculture.

Over the past year, I’ve heard countless stories from network partners about Monica’s positive impact in their work and on people’s lives. I can’t begin to describe the combination of wisdom, intelligence, passion, commitment, humor and generosity that Monica embodies, and the contributions she has made in the building of PAN over 25 years. The clearest evidence of all this is found in the creativity, dedication and

teamwork of PANNA’s remarkable staff, including Steve as managing director, our truly amazing scientists, campaigners, communications specialists, office staff, board members and network partners. These are folks who make PAN North America tick, and who, with your active support, regularly win important struggles in service to our larger mission. I am both proud and humbled to be part of an organization that stands for justice, health and communities —locally and globally.

Thank you so much for your interest in PAN’s work. I hope to engage you even more fully as we create the stories of the next 25 years together. And I look forward to the day that we look back on the significant changes that we’ve leveraged—and on work filled with integrity and passion, with truth and justice.

Kathryn Gilje, Executive Director

Monica Moore (left) recieves the “Advocate for Social Justice Award” from Ecological Farming Association board member Professor Julie Guthman.

� PAN North America Magazine Spring 2007

NewsPAN Fights Renewed Push for DDT The debate over increased reliance on DDT for malaria control continues to swirl. While its advocates cite DDT’s supposed effectiveness against malaria, its opponents note the disas-trous human health and environmental impacts worldwide. Critics note that the pesticide’s widespread use has created DDT-resistant mosquitoes while many safer alternatives for controlling the spread of malaria already exist.

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimate that more than one million people die from malaria annually, 75% of whom are African children. It is estimated that an African child dies every 30 seconds from malaria. The problem is most severe in sub-Saharan Africa.

Henry Diouf of PAN Africa and Paul Saoke of Physicians for Social Responsibility–Kenya attended a DDT Expert Group Meeting in early November in Geneva. At this meeting, WHO officials continued to promote their controversial new emphasis on indoor spraying of DDT for malaria control. Under this pro-gram, African communities deemed vulnerable to malaria would be required to allow DDT spraying inside their homes.

UN Environment Program officials, non-gov-ernmental organizations, and representatives of concerned countries pushed back during the November meeting, pointing out that relying on increasing DDT use—instead of shifting to safer and more effective alternatives—is not only a disservice to the health of communities in Africa, it also endangers the health of people living in the Arctic where DDT and other bio-accumulative chemicals tend to concentrate.

The pro-DDT push directly undermines the Stockholm Convention, an international treaty that stipulates that DDT is only to be used as a short-term measure and encourages the use of other more affordable means of malaria pre-vention, such as mosquito-blocking bed-nets. WHO’s new leader, Dr. Margaret Chan from China, has not yet revealed her position on priorities for malaria control.

Meanwhile, the U.S.-based Congress on Racial Equality (CORE)—which receives financial support from the pesticide giant Monsanto—has been working from its office in Uganda to actively promote reliance on DDT for malaria control programs throughout East Africa. CORE’s work has generated heated debates and controversy across the region. As we go to press, Tanzania is the latest nation to announce that it will commence DDT spraying indoors.

PAN will be coordinating activities around Africa Malaria Day, April 25, and will be working closely with International POPs Elimination Network partners to press for safe malaria control alternatives at the Third Meeting of the Stockholm Convention in Senegal in May.

Last-ditch Try to Pass GOP’s POPs Bill FailsThe 109th Congress came close to passing legislation that would have severely under-mined U.S. participation in the Stockholm Convention, a landmark international treaty that targets persistent organic pollutants (POPs) for global phaseout.

Because POPs remain intact in the environ-ment for long periods, they become widely dis-tributed geographically and accumulate in the food chain, winding up in the fatty tissue of living creatures and becoming toxic to humans and wildlife. POPs circulate globally and can cause damage wherever they travel. The U.S. has signed but not ratified the Stockholm treaty, which (as of early March) has been rati-fied by 141 countries around the world.

As reported in our Fall 2006 issue, the Gillmor POPs Bill (named for its author and aggressive advocate, Ohio Republican Representative Paul Gillmor) passed out of the then-Republican controlled Energy and Commerce commit-tee on a party line vote. This controversial implementing legislation would have delinked U.S. action from international decisions about adding new persistent chemicals to the list for


news

a global ban. The bill also threatened states’ rights with radical preemption of health-pro-tective regulation. The Gillmor bill was blocked by a strong coalition response from the U.S. POPs Working Group (PWG), a coalition of environmental, labor and health professionals. PAN is a leading member of the PWG.

On December 8, only hours before the House adjourned for the holidays, Rep. Gillmor tried to sneak through his POPs bill (co-sponsored by Republicans Barton of Texas and Boehlert of New York), but the effort fizzled before the end of the lame-duck session. With Democrats now in control of the 110th Congress, PAN and our partners are advocating for the U.S. to rejoin the international community as a constructive player on environmental issues, rather than consistently blocking and slowing progress on reducing chemical hazards. We are optimistic that, with the new Congress, the outlook now favors a good POPs bill leading to final ratifica-tion of the Stockholm Convention.

on the web uspopwatch.org and panna.org/resources/pops.html

Morton Grove Bullies Its OpponentsMorton Grove Pharmaceuticals has initi-ated yet another lawsuit to silence its critics. This time, the target is a small, 25-year-old nonprofit dedicated to protecting children’s health. Morton Grove (which is the only U.S. company still formulating products contain-ing the pesticide lindane) is suing the National Pediculosis Association (NPA) for posting information on their website (www.headlice.org) to inform parents and the public about the health effects of lindane.

Despite lindane’s dangers, it is being used as an ingredient in children’s shampoos and skin lotions marketed to control lice and scabies. Alliant Phramaceuticals is a major distributor of lindane shampoo for children.

A neurotoxic organochlorine pesticide, lindane has been banned in 52 countries. Lindane has

been linked to seizures, developmental disabili-ties and hormone disruption. It is known to be particularly hazardous to children. The persis-tent chemical shows up more often than any other pesticide in the Arctic environment.

In August 2006, EPA withdrew lindane from all agricultural uses in the United States. Veterinary uses of lindane were canceled in the late 1990s. Lindane is currently in line to be included on the list of chemicals targeted for a global ban under the Stockholm Convention.

Michigan’s Ecology Center is already battling Morton Grove over a similar suit that the Illinois company filed against the Ann Arbor nonprofit last July. Undeterd by Morton Grove’s lawsuits, Michigan activists are moving forward with demands for a statewide legisla-tive ban of lindane-laced shampoos and lotions. A California ban on the pharmaceutical uses of lindane went into effect in 2001.

NPA is planning to fight their harassment suit and has vowed: “This is the lawsuit that will be heard around the world…because parents care about the health of their children.”

WARNING Seizures and deaths have been reported following Lindane Shampoo use with repeat or prolonged application, but also in rare cases following a single application according to directions. Lindane Shampoo should be used with caution in infants, children, the elderly, and individuals with other skin conditions...and those who weigh [less than] 110 lbs as they may be at risk of serious neurotoxicity.©2006 Alliant Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

it’s more than just caring it’s caring for our kids’ health

PAN graphic. Source: Alliant website, lindane4lice.com .

Lindane Shampoo is a highly effective topical prescription product for head lice that works in JUST 4 MINUTES!


news

P A N U P S

USDA chastised for approving Roundup-ready alfalfa: After the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) approved Monsanto’s plan to produce genetically engi-neered (GE) alfalfa seeds (designed for use with Monsanto’s Roundup® herbicide), organic farmers and the Center for Food Safety filed suit. On February 14, Ninth Circuit Federal Court Judge Charles Breyer called the USDA’s decision “cavalier” and ruled that the agency “had not adequately considered the possibility that the gene could be transferred by pollen to organic or conventional alfalfa, hurting sales of organic farmers.”

White House directive would rein-in federal regulators: As if slashing the budgets of the EPA and the Food and Drug Administration weren’t enough, George W. Bush has signed an executive order to increase political “oversight” of agencies entrusted to protect public health and safety. The New York Times reported that the goal is to make sure these previously independent agencies “carry out the president’s priorities.”

Canadian Mayor pushes for munici-pal pesticide ban: Mayor Fred Eisenberger of Hamilton, Ontario, has called for a sweep-ing ban on pesticide use in his city—despite resistance from opponents who favor “public education” over legal prohibitions. “It’s a public health issue,” Eisenberg insists. “Education only goes so far.”

France fines Monsanto for false advertising: A French court has hit Monsanto and Scotts France with a $19,000 penalty for misleading the public about the dangers of Roundup. A former top Monsanto official had falsely claimed that Roundup was biodegradable and “left the soil clean.”

Roundup is known to damage placental cells and disrupt sexual hormones.

Alaska de-rails herbicide plan: The Anchorage Daily News reports that activists and local community members persuaded Alaska’s Department of Environmental Conservation to block the Alaska Railroad Corporation from spraying some 500 miles of track with herbi-cides. Alaska Community Action on Toxics director Pam Miller declared: “This is a big vic-tory for people who have fought the railroad’s use of herbicides for several decades. We felt the chemical mixture proposed by the railroad would harm water quality, salmon habitat, and people’s health.”

Courts halt GE grass and “bio-pharm” trials: On February 5, USDA was ordered to halt Oregon field trials of genetically engineered Roundup®-resistant grasses from Scotts and Monsanto. The grass was developed to allow increased use of the weed killer on lawns, golf courses and sports fields. According to the Center for Food Safety (CFS), the judge’s decision will “broadly apply to all future field trials of genetically engineered crops.” An earlier suit brought by CFS, PAN and other groups, stopped Monsanto and other companies from growing genetically modified drug-producing corn and sugarcane in Hawaii.

Senators hold EPA chief account-able: Dramatic hearings before the U.S. Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee have revealed that EPA officials conspired with industry representatives to “roll back” existing public health and environmental protections. California Senator Barbara Boxer sent a clear message to EPA Chief Stephen Johnson: “No longer will EPA rollbacks quietly escape scrutiny.”

The following shorts are drawn from the Pesticide Action Network Update Service (PANUPS), our weekly roundup of online news about pesticides, health and alternatives. For the complete stories, to search the PANUPS archive, or to subscribe to PANUPS via email, go to panna.org/resources/panups.html

PeSticide ActioN Network UPdAteS Service


news

Pesticide Action Network is an international organization with Regional Centers in

Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America and North America—and nothing brings home this point like a meeting of PAN International activists.

In November 2006, leaders from the five PAN regions met in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to plan joint campaigns and map strategies for com-bating the global corporate agricultural system that promotes synthetic pesticides, controls food production and distribution, and damages human health and the environment.

At this meeting, the PAN International Planning Committee met as a formal body for the second time. This afforded an opportu-nity to detail how the Regional Centers—and the many other organizations that comprise PAN—will work together on joint interna-tional projects. The sessions also addressed how to strengthen PAN as a global campaigning network.

Representatives from North America reported that the meeting further solidified PAN’s new international structure. Campaigns are now facilitated by working groups focusing on pes-ticides and corporations, genetic engineering, food sovereignty, sustainable alternatives and community-based monitoring.

A highlight of the meeting was a food sover-eignty workshop—conducted by PAN Asia and the Pacific and PAN Latin America—that helped the assembled activists articulate their vision of an agricultural system that could displace corporate control over food, and focus on equitable, sustainable food production by communities for local food security.

And, along the way, PAN delegates from five different continents had a chance to reconnect with old friends, to make new ones ,and to experience the power that comes from being part of a global network working together towards a shared vision.

PAN Gathers for Global Strategy Meeting in Rio

Five continents, one vision: PAN International delegates gather in Rio de Janeiro. Photo: Arcos Rios Palace Hotel


In 2001 and 2002, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) tested the blood

and urine of thousands of U.S. residents for signs of 148 chemicals, 43 of them pesticides.1 Prominent among the list of contaminants found in significant concentrations were organophosphates (OPs), potent nerve toxins used as insecticides in agriculture as well as home and garden, on pets, and in programs to control the carriers of disease.

In the CDC study, the insecticide chlorpyrifos, one of the most infamous OPs, was detected in 76% of those tested. Chlorpyrifos concentra-tions in children aged 6–11 were four times higher than levels considered acceptable by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.2

Because of its particular risks to children, residential use of chlorpyrifos was banned in 2000. But the action did nothing to protect farmworkers, families and children in rural

news

New Organophosphates Campaign Targets Chlorpyrifos

OPAA’s PartnersOPAA continues to grow as it reaches out to PAN’s North America network. The founding members of the Alliance, in addition to Pesticide Action Network, the facilitator, include:

Toxics Action Center, Maine Beyond Pesticides, Washington, DC California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation Center for Environmental Health, California Farm Worker Pesticide Project, Washington Farmworker Association of Florida Farmworker Justice, Washington, DC Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy,

Minnesota Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners

Association Natural Resources Defense Council, California,

Washington, DC & New YorkThe Farmworker Health and Safety Institute,

New Jersey

communities where chlorpyrifos continues to be widely used. PAN North America Senior Scientist Dr. Susan Kegley notes that chlorpy-rifos “interferes with fetal development of neu-rons, which leads to impaired development of motor function and cognitive skills in children. It’s time for us to eliminate this chemical once and for all.”

To address this highly problematic class of pes-ticides, Pesticide Action Network, farmworker and environmental health and justice groups have launched a campaign coalition—the Organophosphate Alternatives Alliance (OPAA)—to work for elimination of the most hazardous OPs. The campaign’s initial targets include chlorpyrifos, azinphos-methyl, diazinon, dichlorvos, malathion and phos-met. In October 2006, PAN and 19 partner organizations submitted public comments to the EPA regarding the Agency’s years-over-due Cumulative Risk Assessment of OPs. In January, PAN and members of the newly formed OPAA coalition filed a public comment letter on malathion with EPA. The comments highlighted years of documented dissent by EPA scientists regarding EPA’s assessment of malathion’s health effects, including its carcino-genicity and developmental neurotoxicity.

According to EPA’s July 2006 Malathion Risk Assessment, the OP malathion also is used as a pediculicide for the treatment of head lice on children.

It’s not news that, in the Bush years, EPA has promoted business interests over public health. But what is new is the scale of the internal revolt that has been growing. In mid 2006, EPA’s career scientists protested the decision by the Agency’s politically appointed admin-istrators to re-register OPs without adequate scientific evidence that these acutely hazard-ous pesticides are safe to use. In the face of convincing data to the contrary, EPA eased pressure on malathion manufacturers by lower-ing the chemical’s purported cancer risk from

ß


news

“likely” to merely “suggestive.” Meanwhile, press reports have revealed that key docu-mentation substantiating the need for the higher risk level had vanished from EPA files. During Senate hearings, Barbara Boxer upbraided EPA Chief Stephen Johnson, not-ing, “according to your own staff, in one of the libraries, 600 to 700 linear feet of the chemical library collection was discarded.”

Exposure to OP pesticides accounts for about one-third of all reported cases of pesticide-related illness in California. OPAA members together with other partner groups have filed legal peti-tions with EPA to ban azinphos-methyl, DDVP, phosmet, and the remaining agricultural uses of chlorpyrifos. In December, PAN filed a similar peti-tion in California requesting that the Department of Pesticide Regulation put chlorpyrifos into “reevaluation” as an air pollutant that is hazardous to human health and take steps to reduce those hazards. To support the campaign to eliminate chlorpyrifos, PAN has posted a petition on the Action Center of our website.

If the new Democrat-majority 110th Congress decides to exert real oversight of EPA—and protect the integrity of the many dedicated scientists serving federal environ-mental and public health agencies—it will find eager allies in the ranks of OPAA.

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Third National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals, 2005.

2. The calculations for this analysis appear in the 2004 PAN North America report, Chemical Trespass.

Rachel Carson CentenaryBiologist, Author, Ecologist1907–1964

This year marks the 100th anniversary of the birth of Rachel Carson, the “Mother of the modern environmental movement.” Carson’s birthday on May 27, will be recognized in the U.S. and worldwide as Rachel Carson Day.

Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring was arguably the single most important stimulus of environmental preservation as we know it today. The 1962 book aroused concern and opened the public’s eyes to the dangers of many chemical pesticides.

This “environmental Bible” appeared at a time when virtually unrestricted spraying of toxic chemicals threatened to damage our ecosystem permanently.

Ms. Carson, native of Springdale, Pennsylvania, and graduate of Chatham College, wrote and released her work with great courage in the face of ridicule (often directed at her gender) and resistance from the pesticide industry.

Nonetheless, Silent Spring reached masses of readers and garnered critical praise for its straightforward, honest examination of a potentially earth-shattering situation.

For information on commemorative events, contact the Rachel Carson Council or Linda Lear at www.rachelcarson.org. You may also contact RachelCarsonHomestead.org for details of events that begin April 20.

Rachel Carson (Brooks Studio). Photo courtesy of the Lear/Carson Collection


poison throughout the Global South, where countries often lack the resources to enforce strict guidelines for using dangerous chemicals.

On February 8, 2007, Syngenta posted record profits—in part due to its merciless marketing of paraquat. But the chemical giant is not going unchallenged. The same day that Syngenta announced its soaring profits, activists and supporters of paraquat victims released their own report, which found Syngenta “Guilty” of profiteering from poison. Nearly 50,000 people cast votes as part of a global grassroots jury that found Syngenta responsible for poisoning tens of thousands.

On February 8, The Berne Declaration (BD) hosted a protest rally on the doorstep of Syngenta’s Basel headquarters. BD, a Swiss non-governmental organization, monitors the activities of the Swiss government and corpo-rations and holds them accountable for their behavior in the Global South.

At the Basel demonstration, a BD spokesperson proclaimed: “Governments and growers are increasingly aware of the dangers of paraquat and are taking action. Syngenta, however, plays deaf and sadly shows no sense of social respon-sibility.” Despite Syngenta’s intransigence, “this global alliance will continue to push for a ban on paraquat. Syngenta will have to give in sooner or later. The longer it waits, the more its image will suffer.”

Meanwhile, companies and governments are taking action to cut the pesticide from their production processes and registration lists. The Common Code for the Coffee Community—which controls roughly two-thirds of the world’s coffee production and whose members include Nestlé and Kraft foods—has called for halting the use of paraquat. In France—Europe’s second largest user of paraquat—the government decided last year to halve sales of the product by the end of 2009.

“Even trusted advisors to Syngenta privately recommend that the company disassociate itself

Every year, the deadly pesticide paraquat kills thousands. The victims range from

innocent workers who suffer painful deaths from accidental exposures, to suicidal farmers who swallow the poison to escape lives ruined by debt. In addition, tens of thousands of farmworkers suffer devastating injuries from being forced to use the chemical without ade-quate safety precautions. There is no antidote for paraquat poisoning.

A PAN “Bad Actor” chemical, paraquat has caused blindness, gastrointestinal illness, and skin damage so severe that transplants are required. To date, 90 organizations from 29 countries have joined an international cam-paign to ban paraquat.

Paraquat is not approved for use in Switzerland, the home country of Syngenta, the company that makes it. So Syngenta markets this terrible

Verdict in Basel: Syngenta Judged “Guilty!”

news

An activist dressed as a judge announces the Berne Declaration’s verdict outside Syngenta’s Swiss headquarters. Photo: Berne Declaration


from this out-moded and destructive product,” said Monica Moore, Regional Coordinator for Pesticide Action Network North America. “We hope that this new information and verdict from Berne Declaration helps convince Syngenta to do the right thing sooner

rather than later to save lives and end the suffering caused by paraquat.”

Resources: The Paraquat Case, www.stop-paraquat.net, “Syngenta: Tidy Profit at the Expense of Pesticide Victims,” Berne Declaration Press Release, February 7, 2007.

Poison Pusher: Michael Pragnell, CEO of Syngenta

news

Rajammah, a Malaysian farmworker blinded by paraquat

Syngenta, a Swiss multinational, makes and promotes many harmful chemicals, including paraquat, a notorious herbicide that has inflicted widespread harm on farmworkers around the world. Chief Executive Michael Pragnell has also been head of Responsible Industry for Sound Environment, an international industry-sponsored group that spends millions to promote pesticide and herbicide poisons as “safe.” Under Pragnell’s leadership, many of Syngenta’s destructive products have continued to hurt people and put the world’s food supply at risk.

According to “Who Benefits from GM Crops?” a 2006 Friends of the Earth International report, “Pragnell proudly shows off Syngenta’s close ties to governments, and apparently sees nothing wrong with the industry writing laws to regulate itself on GMOs.” In December 2006, a state governor in Brazil seized a Syngenta GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) research facility, charging that the company’s testing of experimental genetically engineered seed on corn and soy crops was illegal.

Along with Monsanto and other agro-chemical corporations, Syngenta produces not only pesticides (second largest globally) but also genetically engineered seed. It is the world’s third-largest commercial seed company. It has been pressing African countries to adopt GE crops before adequate testing and safety regulations can be put in place. In 2000, Syngenta was accused of illegally growing contaminated GE maize in New Zealand and shipping it around the world. Similar allegations have been made regarding Syngenta’s introduction of its GE “golden rice” in Asia.

According to GMO Watch, “In March 2006, South American farmers wrote to Michael Pragnell pleading with him to abandon Patent 6,700,039, which could directly threaten the 3,000 potato varieties native to Peru…. If potatoes modified with the ‘terminator gene’ were to cross with other cultivated varieties, Syngenta could effectively take control of the Peruvian food supply through the sales of proprietary chemicals required to ‘switch on’ the potato germination process.” Terminator technology prevents planting proprietary GE varieties

in subsequent years, trapping farmers into buying the patented seed or starts from Syngenta every year.

In December 2006, Syngenta was forced to pay restitution to employees who developed bladder cancer while working at its factory in Monthey, Switzerland. Three of Syngenta’s five U.S. industrial facilities rank among the worst 30% of comparable facilities in total toxic releases.

Syngenta hired biologist Dr. Tyrone Hayes to evaluate the enivironmental impact of atrazine, its heavily marketed pesticide. When Hayes reported strong evidence that atrazine could be responsible for endocrine disruption in frogs in the upper Midwest, Syngenta reportedly attempted to silence Hayes. When that failed, they then tried to discredit him (see the story in our Fall 2006 issue, reprinted from Harper’s). Hayes replicated his research and has continued speaking out on the dangers of atrazine.

Syngenta, along with Novartis and Astra Zeneca (two companies the conglomerate recently acquired) has a long history of contributing millions to Congressmembers, with 70% going to Republicans. Recipients include Senator Sam Brownback and Representative Paul Gillmor, who have promoted legislation to weaken public health and environmental accountability of U.S. chemical corporations. Brownback and Gillmor also have led attacks on international treaties and EU laws on chemical regulation. In 2006, Syngenta reported spending $4.2 million to lobby the EPA, FDA, USDA, Congress, and the White House.

on the web panna.org/magazine/401

�0 PAN North America Magazine Spring 2007

On February 18, fifteen activists from California, Florida, Maine, Minnesota,

Washington, and the Philippines concluded an intensive four-day workshop at the Marin Headlands, north of San Francisco. PAN hosted this “Train the Trainers” workshop to teach participants how to organize and train others to use our pesticide-detecting “Drift Catcher.”

The Drift Catcher is an economical, easy-to-use air-sampling tool designed to give commu-nities the power to detect invisible pesticides in the air they breathe, without waiting (often in vain) for government agencies to do it.

Since 2003, Drift Catchers have been used in California, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Maine, North Carolina, and Washington State. To date, Drift Catchers have detected pesticides in each of these states except North Carolina. In California, Florida and Washington, the Drift Catchers have found airborne pesticide con-centrations that were well above what the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers an “acceptible” level of exposure.

Drift Catcher results released so far have revealed potentially harmful levels of chlorpyri-

fos in the air surrounding farmworkers’ homes in California and Washington State (see story on page 18).

The Headlands gathering included anti-pesti-cide activists, a half-dozen former farmworkers-turned-advocates, two Native Americans from Minnesota’s White Earth Land Restoration Project, two schoolteachers and Dr. Romeo “Romy” Quijano, a physician and environmen-tal crusader from the Philippines.

Quijano told the group how he travels to villages throughout the Philippines treating people poisoned by pesticides. Quijano and his daughter have received death threats for their work. A powerful chemical corporation and a major banana plantation have harassed him with lawsuits (see story in our Fall 2006 issue). Quijano sees the Drift Catcher as an important tool to protect Filipino farmworkers and resi-dents of communities near treated plantations.

Silvia Berrones from Líderes Campesinas, a farmworker women’s self-help network, described how she has watched the steady decline of the health of women who labor in the heat, dust and chemical contamination of California’s fields. “When our people go to the

clinic with pesticide poisoning symptoms, the doctor treats it as an allergy,” Berrones com-plained. “The Drift Catcher will help us document what is affecting our farmworker com-munity.”

Karen Ford, a biology instruc-tor from a high school in St. Augustine, Florida, attended the training session with one of her students, 17-year-old Alex Lowe. Alex and her classmate, ReAnna Green, used one of PAN’s Drift Catchers in a Science Fair project and Gustavo Aquirre (left) and Lupe Martinez (far right) of the Center for Race, Poverty and the

Environment, practice using a Drift Catcher under the supervision of PAN Scientist Karl Tupper.

Drift Catcher Training Draws Activists from Near and Farby Chela Vazquez

news

PAN North America Magazine Spring 2007 ��

news

Marcos Crisantos from the Farm Worker Association of Florida adjusts the flow-rate on a Drift Catcher. Photos: Stephenie Hendricks

detected diazinon and endosulfan (two neu-rotoxic pesticides) and trifluralin (a possible carcinogen) in the air near an elementary school. When the news broke in the local press, school authorities initially tried to dismiss Alex and ReAnna’s research results, but public and parental pressure forced them to hire an outside testing agency to do additional air monitoring.

Community-based environmental monitor-ing is spreading across the U.S. and globally. Over the last decade, PAN Asia and the Pacific (PANAP) has worked with communities across its region to organize Community-based Pesticide Action Monitoring (CPAM), including local self-awareness, surveillance and response teams. PANAP’s CPAM Resource Centre provides a host of useful resources, including an extensive Asian Pesticide Database.

But people are not just grabbing Drift Catchers to track down the pesticides wafting from farms and orchards. Many local groups in the U.S. and abroad have been collecting pollutant samples downwind from refineries and chemi-cal factories as part of the “Bucket Brigade”

movement—using simple plastic buckets as air collectors to trap and test for pollutants.

Denny Larson, the founder of Global Community Monitor and one of the pioneers of the Bucket Brigade movement, was a special guest at the retreat. Larson addressed the room-ful of activists, swapping stories and demon-strating the latest improved version of GCM’s grassroots air-sampler.

Citizens armed with Drift Catchers are taking the initiative in sniffing out toxins in the air because they understand that their health is linked to the quality of their environment.

They also know that change will only come if they step up and gather information them-selves; work together to hold regulatory agen-cies, chemical manufacturers, and politicians accountable—and demand that all chemical poisons are eliminated from the air we all breathe.

Chela Vazquez is the coordinator for PAN North America’s Phase Out Fumigants campaign.

on the web panap.net/18.0.html

�� PAN North America Magazine Spring 2007

Four highly toxic fumigant pesticides—chloropicrin, methyl bromide, methyl isothiocyanate and Telone ®—are

in the final evaluation stage of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Fumigant Cluster Assessment review. (EPA also is evaluating for registration a new fumigant pesticide called methyl iodide. Methyl iodide, a carcinogenic chemical, could replace methyl bromide, which EPA refused to register last year.) The re-registration of older pesticides is mandated by the federal Food Quality Protection Act of 1996. The process was to have been completed by August 2006.

The EPA is well aware of the dangers posed by these fumigants. Fumigants have been responsible for serious poisoning incidents of

farmworkers and communities across the U.S. and around the world.

In 2005, EPA staff met with two agricultural workers in Monterey County, California, who had been exposed to methyl bromide fumigant.

Jorge Fernández and Guillermo Ruiz began to suffer breath-ing problems after placing and removing large, plastic field tarps used to contain the fumi-gant close to the soil. Both men

are now unable to work, have difficulty breath-ing and speaking and are ashamed that they can no longer provide for their families.

“Fumigation with toxic chemicals is deeply entrenched in our agricultural system,” says PAN Staff Scientist Brian R. Hill. But these dangerous chemicals are also being used beyond the fields. Some are used to kill struc-tural pests (homes are tented or buildings are sealed and filled with the fumigant). Another common application is as “commodity fumi-

gants”—typically pumped in gas form over grain, nuts, produce and timber stored in warehouses or shipping containers. Proponents argue that fumigation prior to shipping and storage extends the life of commodities and prevents the spread of pests to the commodi-ties’ destinations.

But, Hill explains, there is no justification for this practice since “safer alternatives for com-modity fumigation—such as treatment with heat, or alternating vacuum with pressurized carbon dioxide—are not only known, they have progressed well beyond the research phase, are economically competitive, and are ready for widespread use.” Unfortunately, requirements for the integration of these nontoxic alterna-tives were “conspicuously absent” from EPA’s proposed re-registration decision.

Chemical fumigants are injected or dripped into the soil in large quantities (typically 100–400 pounds per acre) to kill pathogens such as fungi, nematodes, weeds and other pests prior to planting potatoes, strawberries, tomatoes, vegetables and other crops. After application, a large fraction of the fumigant can volatilize from the soil and be transported by air and winds.* This pesticide drift poses a health risk to farmworkers, their families, and residents of adjacent communities—all innocent bystand-ers. Even people living a mile or more from the site of application may be exposed.

Also, fumigants can contaminate groundwa-ter by percolating downward. Fumigants are substantial contributors to volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that react with oxides of nitrogen (NOx) to form ozone, a ground-level air pollutant that can cause respiratory prob-lems and worsen existing health conditions.

In 2005 and 2006, as part of the fumigant cluster process, EPA released preliminary risk assessments and requested public comments on chloropicrin, methyl bromide, telone, and

PAN to EPA:

Phase Out Fumigants

Fumigants have been

responsible for serious poisoning incidents of farmworkers and communities across the U.S. and around the world.


methyl isothiocyanate (a gas produced by metam sodium and dazomet). In both letters and meetings with EPA officials, PAN and several partner organizations have expressed opposition to the continued use of these toxic chemicals and have asked the agency to:

1. Begin a permanent phaseout of all highly volatile soil fumigants,

2. Stop registration of any new toxic and volatile chemicals as replacements,

3. Set numerical targets and timelines for the phaseout of fumigant pesticides,

4. Expand research, implementation and transition programs for non-chemical methods of pest control and soil/pest management and,

5. Develop outreach programs for farmers to facilitate their transition to safer non-chemical methods of pest control.

PAN also proposed concrete actions and mitigation measures for the phaseout period, including use of more protective buffer zones, low-emission application techniques, limited application amounts and 48-hour advance notifications to all affected parties before appli-cations are to occur.

In the coming months, EPA will determine whether to continue permitting the use of this dangerous, antiquated technology and, if so, whether to issue proposed new regulations on their proper handling. After the final assess-ment documents are released, EPA will accept comments and hold stakeholder hearings in Florida, California and Washington State.

Now is the time to tell EPA to do their job of protecting human health from dangerous chemicals and stop taking the lead from the chemical industry. The stakeholder hearings in Florida, California and Washington will pro-vide an opportunity to tell EPA that we don’t want these poisons used in our communities. It is an opportune time to push for a national

phaseout of fumigant pesticides. In the months ahead, it is crucial to mobilize our communities to attend the hearings and let EPA know of the personal effects fumigants have had on indi-viduals and families, as well as the damage they are doing to our ecosystem.

The hearings are a chance to share our local experiences with fumigant drift and worker exposures—valuable information EPA offi-cials will not hear from the chemical indus-try or from growers who have not yet made the switch to more sustainable farming. It is imperative to let EPA hear the message that the health of our children, families, and environ-ment matter more than corporate profits.

on the web The EPA will hold public hearings on fumigants in Tulare, California, in May and in Fort Myers, Florida, in June. For the exact dates—and for information about a potential third hearing in Washington State—check the following link: http://panna.org/campaigns/fumigant.html

And stay tuned to our Action Alerts at http://action.panna.org

* SK Papiernik et al., “Effect of Application Variables on Emissions and Distribution of Fumigants Applied via Subsurface Drip Irrigation,” Envi. Sci Tech. 38 (2004) 5489, http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/esthag/2004/38/i21/abs/es049064q.html.

Community activists protest the use of methyl bromide outside a San Diego commodity fumigation facility located near a school. Photo: Environmental Health Coalition


New Congressional hearings address

accusations from EPA and FDA scientists of intimidation, weakening of regulatory agencies.

In its first two months, leaders of the new Congress launched hearings to investi-gate charges of political interference with

the scientific work of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Agency scientists have been speaking out about collusion between the chemical and pharma-ceutical industries and White House appoin-tees. For example, EPA scientists opposed the Agency’s “human testing rule” because it vio-lates Congress’s unequivocal ban on testing pes-ticides on pregnant women and children. The rule was issued shortly after an August 9, 2005 meeting in which pesticide industry repre-

sentatives urged top Administration officials to move quickly and “never say never” regard-ing testing on chil-dren (see our Summer 2006 issue). Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER),

observed, “After reading the ghoulish notes [of the meeting], one has the urge to take a shower.”

Sources inside the Agency claim that the Bush budget for FY2008 will close critical laborato-ries and eliminate the positions of seasoned sci-entists. Already, EPA administrators have closed down important Agency libraries and destroyed crucial research documents. According to PEER, irreplaceable files archived in the Office of Prevention, Pollution and Toxic Substances were ordered recycled or “thrown into trash bins.” The collection included 228,772 docu-ments on chlorpyrifos, an organophosphate banned for residential use, but approved for agricultural application.1

When EPA administrators failed to withdraw organophosphate pesticides last August, it was over the objections of their own staff scien-

tists (see “Organophosphates,” page 6). EPA’s political appointees now insist on monitor-ing all contacts between its staff scientists and the media. At the same time, veteran EPA staff who disagree with political appointees are being pressured to retire early. In another maneuver designed to undercut the Agency’s freedom from interference, “outsourcing” plans are being developed that will enable Bush-appointed administrators to turn over regula-tory research to the chemical industry.

In September 2006, the White House stripped 170,000 federal scientists of whistleblower protection using an “unpublished opinion” from the Attorney General’s Office that granted George W. Bush “sovereign immunity.”2

Agency scientists and their unions are standing up to these attacks, with support from PEER, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), PAN and progressive members of the 110th Congress who have begun to investigate the scientists’ plight.

On January 30, Representative Henry Waxman (D-Los Angeles), chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, initiated Hearings on Political Influence on Government Climate Change Scientists. The committee heard from staff scientists who complained that politically appointed supervisors had tried to silence their work on global warming. UCS Senior Scientist Dr. Francesca Grifo cited a sur-vey of federal scientists from the FDA, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and other agencies that corroborated the reports of intimidation from EPA staff. UCS surveyed more than 1,800 federal scientists and found that:

• 145 FDA scientists reported being asked, for non-scientific reasons, to inappropriately exclude or alter technical information or change their conclusions in an FDA scien-tific document;

• Nearly half (44%) of all FWS scientists whose work is to evaluate endangered spe-cies reported that they had been directed,

Federal Scientists Protest White House Meddlingby Stephenie Hendricks

EPAX


for non-scientific reasons, to refrain from making findings that would protect a species and,

• 150 federal climate scientists reported per-sonally experiencing at least one incident of political interference in the past five years—for a total of at least 435 such incidents.

Grifo warned the committee: “The thousands of scientists in the employ of the federal gov-ernment represent a tremendous resource and their knowledge and advice should be heeded, rather than manipulated or ignored. The mes-sage of these statistics is clear: without strong action to restore integrity to federal science, our nation will be ill-prepared to deal with the challenges we face.”3

On February 6, Senator Barbara Boxer con-vened the first Full Committee Hearing on Oversight of Recent EPA Decisions. Speakers included EPA Chief Stephen Johnson, Dr. Gina Solomon, Senior Scientist from the Natural Resource Defense Council, and Leslie Burger from the American Library Association. The speakers criticized EPA’s closure of important research libraries and rollbacks of protections from exposures to toxic chemi-cals—including lead and perchlorate. The committee also addressed EPA’s weakening of the Toxic Release Inventory rule.

Dr. Solomon told the committee, “With these EPA rollbacks in place, we see communi-ties breathing dirtier air, children exposed to more toxic lead, pregnant women unknow-ingly drinking thyroid-disrupting rocket fuel, scientists sidelined, and information vanishing. It’s not a pretty future. Yet I am optimistic that many of these bad outcomes can be averted. EPA has not finalized several of these proposals, and some of the actions can be reversed.”

In her opening statement, Senator Boxer declared: “Toxic air pollutants include some of the most dangerous cancer-causing and neurotoxic chemicals that pose a serious health threat to American families, especially pregnant

women, infants, and children. Increased levels of toxic air pollutants will only increase these risks. The pattern of these year-end actions is striking—the public interest is sacrificed and environmental protection compromised. Who gains from these rollbacks? Just look at who asked for them—like Big Oil and the battery industry. EPA’s actions and proposed actions make it clear who EPA is protecting. The purpose of these oversight hearings is to remind EPA who they are truly accountable to—the American people.”4

During the hearing, Boxer admonished Johnson: “I want to send a clear signal to EPA and to this administration: We are watching. No longer will EPA rollbacks quietly escape scrutiny.”

On March 15, as we went to press, the House passed a federal Whistleblowers’ Protection Act to defend embattled government scientists.

Stephenie Hendricks is Public Information & Media Director at PAN North America.

1. “Stealth Closure of Principal EPA Library,” PEER, October 30, 2006.

2. “Bush Declares Eco-whistleblower Law Void for EPA Employees,” PEER, September 4, 2006.

3. House Hearing on Political Influence on Government Scientists, http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1162.

4. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, http://epw.senate.gove/public/index.cfm.

on the web Extensive documentation for this article can be found on www.peer.org. For details, see panna.org/magazine/402.

What You Can DoAs hearings continue and 2008 elections gear up, make sure your federal, state, and local representatives know you support strong protection for health and the environment, independent science and the right of agency staff to blow the whistle on corrupt practices within government. You can sign the UCS’ “Integrity of Science” Call to Action at www.ucsusa.org and another petition at www.peer.org.


Profiles of CourageMeeting the Farmers behind Brazil’s Land-Rights Battle

by Kathryn Gilje and Medha Chandra

In November 2006, 15 PAN members from around the world spent a day with three organic farmers living two hours north of Rio de Janeiro

in Brazil. The PAN delegates—from Argentina, Benin, Chile, Germany, Malaysia, New Zealand, Paraguay, Senegal and the U.S.—had an opportunity to see firsthand the benefits of land reform, however limited, for Brazil’s small farmers and landless peas-ants. The three farmers we met grow more than 100 crops on agroecological farms—biodiverse settings that feature vegetables and fruits nestled among a living forest.

The farmers’ ability to produce such a bounty was hard-won. They only gained title to their land after a ten-year struggle and with the active involvement of the Brazilian Landless People’s Movement—the Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra (MST).

For the past 500 years, Brazil has been plagued by the unequal distribution of land. Wealthy landown-ers ruled the countryside with impunity, grabbing the best land—sometimes violently. At the same time, they held sway over the Brazilian legislature and courts, making it impossible for poor farmers and the landless to obtain justice. Until recently, these large landowners controlled the economy, trapping

millions of Brazilians in poverty. It was this his-toric injustice that gave birth to the MST.

The MST was officially founded in southern Brazil in 1984, after a period of rapid indus-trialization and mecha-nization of agriculture forced farmers to move

from the countryside to urban areas to make a liv-ing. Over the years, the MST has relied on marches, protests, sit-ins and land occupations to address the problems of the country’s landless citizens. The MST’s tactic of occupying unused land, draws on a Brazilian law that requires that any land lying idle

Since its founding, the

MST has forced the government to redistribute 20 million acres of agricultural land.

and not being used to its productive potential will be bought by the government and redistributed to land-less peasants.

Since its founding, the MST has forced the govern-ment to redistribute 20 million acres of agricultural land, won land titles for 350,000 families, founded approximately 1,000 rural schools, and formed an impressive network of profitable cooperatives.

In the village of Seropedica, members of PAN’s global team had the honor of meeting several courageous men who had struggled for more than

ten years to gain access to this land. The decade-long struggle reached its climax when the farmers set up camps on the disputed property. For more than a year, the squatters faced threats from armed militias hired by the landowners and several of the campers were wounded. At one point, their encampment was set ablaze.

Finally, in 1994, with the MST’s support, the gov-ernment gave the defiant squatters custody of the land. Infrastructure and improvements have been slow in coming, however. While the farmers’ collec-tive eventually secured access to electricity, they are still struggling to acquire adequate supplies of water, sanitation, schools and medical facilities.

The farmers became responsible for a stretch of deforested land that had been cleared by fire, doused with pesticides, overgrazed by cattle and scarred by erosion. They have since demonstrated how hard work, skill, determination and traditional knowledge can restore exploited soil and transform degraded pastureland into productive, diverse organic farms.

Seropedica’s farmers didn’t begin as organic grow-ers. They were prompted to forge a partnership with the Agricultural Ecology Group at the nearby Agricultural University of Rio de Janeiro after wit-nessing how pesticides were damaging the local veg-etation—and after several farmers were stricken with pesticide poisoning.


Front row (L-R): Farmer (name unknown), organic farmer Erenildo Luiz da Silva, two students from Rio’s Agricultural University, Medha Chandra (USA), Meriel Watts (New Zealand), Maria Isabel Carcamo (Paraguay); Sebastião Antônio de Oliveira (organic farmer), Tony Tujan, Jr. (Malaysia); Abou Thiam (Senegal). Back row (L-R): Igor Conde (an Agricultural University student), Sarojeni Rengam (Malaysia), Javier Souza (Argentina); Kathryn Gilje (USA), Susan Haffmans (Germany); Monica Moore (USA), Carina Weber (Germany), Henry René Diouf (Senegal); Simplice Davo Voudouhe (Benin); Gilbert Sape (Malaysia). Photo: Mel Romero

The PAN delegates met with Sebastião and Erenildo, two farmers who had squatted and risked their lives to win their claim to the

land. They explained how they began their farms on the badly degraded soil, working together to support each other’s farm while maintaining their individual land ownership.

Although much of the land is still deforested and toxic pesticides are used by other farmers in the region, all the farms that PAN visited were organic and agroeco-logical operations. “Agroecological” farms go beyond pesticide-free practices by adopting strategies that involve the entire ecosystem—plants, soil, landscape and animals. Seropedica’s farmers also employ agro-forestry, an ancient practice that integrates trees into agriculturally productive landscapes. The trees encour-age biodiverse habitats while providing fertilizer, fruit, fuel wood, and fodder for livestock.

The agroforest contains more than 51 kinds of trees, 52 fruits and 40 vegetables. The crops include pine-apples, papayas, bananas, spoon lemons, mangoes,

oranges, beans, pumpkins and aipims. As we walked through the forest, fields, pastures and animal pens, the farmers plucked dozens of different fruits, veg-etables, seeds and herbs for us to sample.

The farmers sell their produce at an organic farm-ers’ market in Rio de Janeiro, a four-hour round trip. They are hopeful that the nearby town will open a market someday soon. The farmers have been certified by the Association of Biological Producers (ABIO) and this recognition has inspired their neighbors to consider making the transition to organic farming as well. Increasingly, the region’s farmers are looking for sustainable alternatives.

Sebastião and Erenildo demonstrated a strong sense of satisfaction and pride at their success as owners and stewards of the land. Meeting them brought home a message of hope for all of us who are working globally and in our own countries to promote safe and sustain-able farming.

Kathryn Gilje is PANNA’s Executive Director and Dr. Medha Chandra is Organochlorine Campaign Director.


Poisons on the Wind Drift Catching in Washington State

Please, don’t use my name,” the woman pleaded. She was hesitant to speak with representatives of Washington State’s

Farm Worker Pesticide Project (FWPP) and only agreed to tell her story if she could use a pseudonym, “Anita.” Meeting with activists at a public park in Yakima, Anita described the day in 2004 when she was working in an apple orchard. A tractor rolled by about 50 feet away, spraying a cloud of pesticide. Within minutes her face and arms erupted in a red rash, her head began to throb and she began to vomit.

Such stories are far too common in Washington’s apple, pear and cherry orchards where rows of trees are routinely doused with organophosphate (OP) and carbamate insec-ticides. In 2005, Washington’s orchards were treated with 226,400 pounds of the OP chlor-pyrifos. Despite the fact that 58% of the state’s apple trees are treated with these pesticides, state and federal agencies do not require grow-ers to report pesticide use or provide warning notifications prior to use.

“My children are breathing poisons and some-thing’s got to be done to stop this,” says FWPP Community Organizer Manuel Perez. “We have a right to breathe clean air.” Perez and his family live near orchards where pesticides are applied. Like most Yakima residents, the Perez family only had suspicions that they were being poisoned. Now they have facts.

“Washington Department of Agriculture officials dismissed community concerns about air quality without making any effort to find out what people are actually breathing,” says FWPP Executive Director Carol Dansereau, “So people were forced to test the air them-selves.”

In the spring of 2006, with the assistance of FWPP and Pesticide Action Network, farmworker families in two Yakima Valley locations tested the air with “Drift Catchers”—inexpensive, air-monitors designed by PAN chemist Dr. Susan Kegley. The air samples cap-tured by these farm families tested positive for chlorpyifos—the key ingredient in Lorsban, an

Washington State’s Yakima Valley resembles a Garden of Eden — just don’t breathe the air. Photo: Susan Kegley


insecticide widely used in local orchards. The results were published in a December 2006 joint FWPP–PAN report, Poisons on the Wind: Community Air Monitoring for Chlorpyrifos in Yakima Valley. (An executive summary is avail-able in Spanish.)

Chlorpyrifos is an organophos-phate that has recently been linked to developmental disorders and ADHD in children. The compound has also been linked to asthma, as well as lung cancer in farmers. Although banned for residential application in 2000, its use is still permitted in agricul-ture.

Exposure to carbamate and organophosphate pesticides like chlorpyrifos is known to inhibit the activity of cholinesterase, an important nervous system enzyme. At least one in ten Washington State farmworkers have registered cholinesterase drops of more than 20% following exposure to chlorpyrifos. About 2% of the tested workers showed even more severe declines. California also has a program for monitoring farmworkers’ cholinesterase but only Washington has informed the public of the results. (Because cholinesterase activity varies naturally, the 20% number provides a threshold for noticing decreases compared to normal.)

At lower exposure levels, people may experience nausea, dizziness, mental confusion, headaches, and breathing problems. Higher exposures can lead to convul-sions, respiratory distress and death. Fetal exposures can dam-age the nervous system, resulting in developmental problems. The monitoring in Washington State showed that there are many days during the chlorpyrifos spray season when the air is simply not safe to breathe.

In the town of Cowiche, a Drift Catching project was carried out Is the orchard across from your front door a source of invisible poisons? The Drift Catcher (right)

may have the answer. Photo: FWPP

by a former farmworker in the backyard of a home he shares with his wife and three children (ages 3, 8 and 12). An apple orchard is located 57 feet from where the Drift Catcher was set up. Chlorpyrifos was detected on each of the 21 days sampled.

Tests in PAN’s laboratory estab-lished that airborne pesticide levels exceeded the U.S. EPA’s “acceptable” dose for one-year-olds on 38% of the days sam-pled. The highest concentration measured for a single 24-hour period was 3.4 times the acute Reference Exposure Level (REL) for a child. Exposures would have been even higher had it not been for the fact that prevailing winds tended to blow the drift away from the house.

In the nearby town of Tieton, air monitor-ing was undertaken at a home shared by three children and their pregnant mother. Orchards surround their home, the nearest trees stand-ing less than 46 feet from their house. Again, chlorpyrifos was detected on each sampling day. And again, levels exceeded the acute and sub-chronic RELs for children 38% of the time. PAN’s laboratory analyses were verified by an independent commercial laboratory.


The REL represents the concentration below which no adverse health effects are expected to occur. But the “acceptable” dose of chlorpyrifos is based on only one measure of the chemical’s ability to cause damage—cholinesterase inhibi-tion. Recent research suggests that chlorpyrifos and other organophosphates can also be a danger to developing babies through different mechanisms of toxicity as well.

Homes, daycare centers, schools, and work-places are often as close or closer to orchards

than these test sites. This suggests that large numbers of people may be unsuspectingly inhaling chlorpyrifos. Between 2000 and 2004, Washington State’s Department of Health recorded 172 incidents in which people were stricken with pesticide poisoning. Surprisingly, only 47% (81) were agricultural workers; 53% (91) of those affected were people exposed in their homes, in public parks or simply driving down country roads.

Under state law it is illegal for anyone to handle agricultural pesticides in a manner that allows the pesticide to expose others through drift. Our air monitoring results indicate that this requirement is being violated on a poten-tially massive scale and neither the Washington State Department of Agriculture nor the EPA is taking the necessary steps to protect the public. The Drift Catcher results exposed the problem of “post-application drift,” which can pose a health risk days after the actual application. Although significant levels of pesticides can be released as they slowly “volatize” off soil and crop surfaces, the EPA does not recognize this as a problem for regulatory concern.

FWPP has long called for effective policies to address the drift issue, such as:

• Create no-spray buffer zones around unprotected workers, homes and schools,

Unknown pesticides were applied to the orchard near this Cowiche home soon after the Drift Catching project ended. Photo: FWPP

Troubling News from Columbia UniversityThe dangers of chlorpyrifos exposure were highlighted by recent reports in the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. Research conducted by Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health reviewed the health of children exposed to chlorpyrifos before the pesticide was banned for residential use in 2000. The Columbia researchers followed 250 New York inner-city children from before birth to the age of three and concluded: “Children who were exposed prenatally to the insecticide chlorpyrifos had significantly poorer mental and motor development by three years of age and increased risk for behavior problems.”

The full report is available at: http://www.mailman.hs.columbia.edu/news/CCCEH_Chloro.html. Also see: Wyatt, RM, et al., Pediatrics, 2006, 1845-1859.

ß


• Prohibit applications when wind speeds exceed five mph and gusts exceed ten mph,

• Discourage the use of drift-prone technologies such as air-blast sprayers,

• Establish timelines to phase out the most dangerous pesticides and,

• Assist growers who wish to shift to safer alternatives.

Farmworker communities and public interest groups have helped shine a light on a matter that has been kept in the dark for too long. In the absence of government testing, our Washington State findings have documented what was long suspected—the air around many of Washington’s fields and orchards is not safe to breathe.

FWPP has called upon Washington Governor Christine Gregoire to direct the Departments of Agriculture, Ecology, Health, and Labor & Industries to establish acomprehensive and effective air monitoring program.

HB 1810, introduced on February 6, would require the state to “monitor pesticide drift and its impacts.” Air testing for chlorpyrifos and other chemical agents would be done during times of high pesticide use. The Department of Health would analyze the test results.

In addition, we have asked that Washington State University’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources launch an Alternatives Assessment with state funding.

“You can grow food without pesticides,” says Adolfo Alvarez, an organic orchard owner and

an FWPP board member. “Before I got my own orchards, I was exposed to pesticides as a farmworker and it made me sick,” he explains. “I want to protect my workers, their children and neighbors, so I use alternatives.”

We cannot allow these exposures to continue, not only because of what we know today about the health impacts, but also because of what we don’t yet know.

on the web Download the report at www.panna.org and www.fwpp.org.

Chlorpyrifos concentrations in Cowiche, April 3–23, 2006. REL = Reference Exposure Level calculated from U.S. EPA’s “acceptable” daily dose for acute and sub-chronic exposures. EMA Labs results corrected to account for average recoveries of 65%.

Members of Yakima’s farmworker community assemble a Drift Catcher. Photo: FWPP


This spud’s for you. And, thanks to the mustard, there’s less chemical contamination.Photo: Harry Morse

Spread the News:

Mustard Can Drive Away Pests by Pam Sherwood

Across the Pacific Northwest, a movement is afoot to reduce synthetic chemical fumigants in the production of the region’s massive

potato crop. In a region where farmers once stock-piled barrels of toxic ethylene dibromide, farmers are now learning to fight pests with meadows of mustard. This year, it is estimated that nearly 40,000

acres of potato fields in Washington and Idaho will have switched from using dangerous synthetic fumigants like metam sodium to employing mustard as a less expensive, natural bio-fumigant.

It is an issue that is as close as the dinner table. Americans eat about 140 pounds of potatoes per-person per-year, accord-ing to U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Economic Research Service. But there’s no reason our appetite for potato salad and fries needs to be satis-fied at the expense of the health of our environment.

How important is the Pacific Northwest potato crop? Well, it accounts for more than half of America’s $3 billion potato industry. Idaho and Washington are two of the nation’s top producers and one of the biggest and most influential play-ers in this region is the Fort Hall Indian Reservation.

The reservation extends over 520,000 acres of southeast Idaho. But it isn’t just one of the richest potato growing areas in the Northwest—it is also one of the most fragile since its sandy soil is highly susceptible to erosion.

This coming season, an estimated 20,000 acres of Idaho potatoes will be cultivated in a program designed to limit chemical fumigant use by planting Pacific Gold and Caliente mustard. In an experiment funded through the USDA, these potato growers will plant mustard between wheat and potato crops. When the mustard is plowed into the soil, it acts as a natural bio-fumigant to foil soil

Solutions

news


Spice Up Your Fuel Tank… With Mustard In addition to serving as a natural Earth-born alternative to chemical pesticides, the mighty mustard plant soon could be filling your gas tank—if you drive a diesel-powered vehicle, that is.

The Department of Energy’s Mustard Project envisions fields of yellow flowers serving as both pest-suppressor and fuel-additive. Since mustard seeds contain up to 50 times more pest-busting ingredients than the roots, stems and leaves, this biomass can be harvested for use as a feedstock to generate alcohol for biodiesel production.

Meanwhile, Colorado-based Blue Sun sees mustard seed oil as a good bet to replace soybean oil as a biofuel. The oil content of soybeans is only 18% but mustard seeds are 40% oil. It takes less energy to process mustard seed oil into biofuel and the end-product offers better performance—a higher octane rating, better cold-weather starts and improved lubrication.

The Energy Department’s immediate goal is to produce six billion gallons of mustard oil biodiesel costing less than a dollar a gallon. A plant that fights both nematodes and global warming, mustard provides the kind of win-win solution you’ve just got to relish.

ß

pests. This “green manure” also helps to coun-ter erosion and nitrate losses.

Using mustard as a rotational crop costs less than chemical fumigation and is proving effective in curbing nematodes and early-die in potatoes. Chemical fumigation can cost more than $100 per acre while bio-fumigation with mustard costs an average of $60 per acre. The seeds are not your standard commercial mustard; they are imported from abroad and require an extra 10 inches of water over a six-week growth cycle.

Within two or three weeks of seeding in the fall, the fields spring to life with a carpet of green and gold. After six weeks, the mustard crop is beaten down, lightly plowed and incor-porated back into the soil. As mustard greens decompose, they produce methyl isothiocya-nate (MITC)—the same substance produced by the synthetic chemical fumigant metam sodium.MITC works to control hundreds of pests, including nematodes, the potato-growers’ nemesis.

Richard Rouch, Dean of the University of Melbourne’s Faculty of Land and Food Resources, cautions that mustard’s MITC is likely to produce ground-level ozone-forming chemicals. While lab studies have shown that MITC is “effectively removed from the atmo-sphere by sunlight” within a matter of hours,1, 2 its breakdown produces other toxic chemicals.

Mustard’s advantage is that it slowly delivers a small, “targeted dose” of MITC deep within the soil. By contrast, applying metam sodium involves the release of huge amounts of the chemical, much of which escapes into the air.

The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes lease approxi-mately 115,000 acres to area potato growers in three adjoining counties on the Fort Hall Reservation. This is about one-third of Idaho’s potato acreage.

The use of chemicals in potato produc-tion on such a vast scale is closely regulated. Groundwater pollution is a serious con-

cern—both on the reservation and among the private well owners around the reservation. While saving money is critical to the survival of potato growers leasing tribal lands, assuring water quality is vital to the survival of the entire region.

Ethylene dibromide (EDB) was used on the reservation’s potato crops until it was banned in the late 1970s. But years of constant use left chemicals slowly seeping into the groundwater. Excessive concentrations of nitrates have also been detected in the water and are being closely monitored.

In 1997, the U.S. EPA reviewed EDB levels in drinking water in wells adjacent to and on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation. Red flags were raised. The concentrations found posed

solutions


unacceptable cancer risks. Families were told not to drink the water flowing from their taps.

Water began to arrive on the reservation by the tanker load. Adjacent landowners had their wells shut down.

Business as usual ceased. Farming practices and all pesticide and chemical use underwent critical review. Changes in chemical use were instituted as growers began searching for farming practices

that would keep chemical pollutants out of the groundwater.

All chemical use on the reservation is now tightly regulated and regularly reviewed, and a series of pilot projects using chemical-free

alternatives were started. Tribal officials are encouraging the switch to bio-fumigants and special demonstration projects are underway to establish the best approaches.

Last May, the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the Shoshone-Bannock Tribal Business Council, Three Rivers Resources, Conservation & Development, the Shoshone-Bannock Land Use Commission and the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides joined together to develop an outreach and demonstration project on the reservation.

According to Tom Liddil, the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes’ agricultural resources manager, “It’s become a priority on the reservation to make sure that we maintain good soil health and reduce the amount of pesticides.”

On a clear day, you can see fields of mustard as far as the horizon — more proof that it’s possible to save the Earth and save money, too.

In a region where farmers once

stockpiled barrels of toxic ethylene dibromide, farmers are now learning to fight pests with meadows of mustard.

solutions


Changing farmers’ attitudes and farming practices is not easy. Word-of-mouth is usually more persuasive than word-from-on-high. In this case, local growers began hearing stories from farmers in eastern Washington who were reporting that mustard rotation was cutting costs, enriching the soil, and discouraging pests at the same time. A Sustainable Agriculture and Research Education grant from the USDA allowed potato farmers in eastern Idaho to substitute mustard greens in place of fumigants on a 160-acre demonstration plot.

Like many farmers on and off the reservation, potato grower Dennis Wasia was looking for better ways to control nematodes and verticil-lium wilt, reduce costs and conserve soil and water quality. “I have seen some really nice spuds come off fields with the mustard rota-tion,” says Wasia. “I planted about 40 acres in the mustard demonstration area last year and this year I am planting a whole pivot of about 120 acres.”

Ed Smith Farms, which cultivates nearly 1,000 acres of potatoes on deeded and leased reser-vation land in Power County, has been using mustard to enhance yield and reduce chemi-cal use. This year’s crop was very good. Bill Meadows, a seed dealer in American Falls, believes the use of mustard seeds will continue to increase. Orders for mustard seed are up again this year.

Meanwhile, the USDA Vegetable and Forage Crops Production Research Unit in Prosser, Washington, is attempting to develop mustard seed varieties that require less water. Earth’s changing climate is bringing longer, hotter days to the region. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that the region could see temperatures rise 5°F by 2100. During drought years, the cost of using an extra ten inches of water in the fall could pose substan-tial financial problems.

Mustard use, coupled with other biological and conservation practices, promises to help solve some of Forth Hall’s water pollution problems while saving potato growers money on the production costs.

The NRCS is working with farmers by provid-ing cost-share money for planting mustard on reservation plots of 50 acres or less. “We want to help farmers get started in this program,” says Kurt Cates, NRCS district conservation-ist for the Shoshone-Bannock Tribal Natural Resources Conservation District. “Any way we can utilize sustainable agriculture and decrease man-made chemicals to raise crops goes a long way to preventing further contamination of groundwater.”

The future looks bright for the reservation’s leafy green and yellow mustard crop. The tribe is behind it, private industry sees its value, and profit-potential and governmental agencies are supporting it.

Pam Sherwood is an Idaho-based freelance writer whose beats include cancer-causing chemicals in the environment.

1. Alvarez, Ramón C. and Moore, C. Bradley, Science, Jan. 14, 1994. http://www.sciencemag.org/cpi/content/abstract/263/5144/205

2. Geddes, Jason D., et al., “Gas Phase Photolysis of Methyl Isothiocyanate,” Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 29, No 10, 1995.

M ustard use, coupled with

other biological and conservation practices, promises to help solve... water contamination problems while saving potato growers money on production costs.

solutions

Mustard as Green ManureThe Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides reports that using mustard as a green manure chopped into winter soil before the spring planting of potatoes—helps stabilize the soil, increases water infiltration and reduces erosion. NCAP reports savings of as much as $85 per acre when mustard was used to replace chemical fumigants. NCAP and the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes have been jointly exploring mustard green-manure cropping for pest control and improved soil health on the reservation since 2002.

NCAP, PO Box 1393, Eugene, OR 97440-1393, (541) 344-5044, www.pesticide.org.


Nestled in California’s Capay Valley west of Sacramento, Full Belly Farm is a well-established organic farm

known for its quality produce, its innovative marketing, and its progressive employee rela-tions. Fully Belly grows and markets 80 kinds of organic crops—including almonds, arugula, beans, basil, beets, corn, jalapeños, lettuce, five varieties of cherry tomatoes and 11 kinds of winter squash. The small but highly productive 200-acre farm has seen its gross revenues rise 10–15% per-year over the past decade. “There are plenty of organic vegetable farms struggling in Northern California,” the Rodale Institute notes, but “none has it together like Full Belly.”

Full Belly Farm was started in 1989 by four partners—Andrew Brait, Paul Muller, Judith Redmond, and Dru Rivers—on land that had been farmed organically since 1984. Fully credentialed by California Certified Organic Farmers, Full Belly avoids synthetic chemicals and uses compost and nitrogen-fixing cover crops that provide organic matter for the soil. These are the kind of holistic hoe-handlers who realize the importance of planting wildflower

habitat to attract beneficial insects. Some flower gardens are planted just for beauty and 20 acres have been set aside as riparian wild land.

Full Belly’s flock of sheep, chickens and some cows all play important functions in the farm’s integrated operation. The farm’s 100 sheep are managed in a rotational grazing pattern, munching on crop residues and cover crops. The byproduct is a useful manure that’s incor-porated into the soil.

The owners take pride in the farm’s biological diversity. Growing an ever-changing variety of crops helps prevent diseases and pests from gaining a toe-hold. This broad diversity (which includes hard-to-find heirloom varieties) also appeals to the farm’s customers. Because of the region’s benign climate, farming operations continue year-round.

The farm has nearly 50 full-time employees. Year-long employment is rare in farms of this size since most small operations rely on only a handful of permanent employees and hire seasonal workers during harvests.

“Wouldn’t it be nice,” partner Paul Muller mused during a chat with California environ-mental writer David Kupfer, “if, in the future, we judged organic farmers by how well they are taking care of all parts of the agriculture sys-tem, making sure farm labor is as healthy and cared-for as any other aspect of the farm?”*

Fully Belly pays its workers more than the min-imum wage, provides longer-term workers with health care benefits, and has helped employees purchase family homes in the community.

“Everyone in the food chain needs to adopt a sense of fairness and responsibility for the well-being of farm laborers,” Muller insists. “It needs to be a partnership through the whole agriculture system, with wholesalers and con-sumers paying fair prices that then assure that farmworkers are adequately compensated…. The equation of greater social responsibility Behind every squash and almond that comes from Full Belly Farm, there’s a

hard-working team of dedicated—and well-paid—employees. Photo: Full Belly Farm

Getting Your Fill at Full Belly Farm

solutions


needs to be integrated through the whole food system.”

Full Belly’s goods are sold mostly in California, but some reach other states through their wholesale distributors. The company has a

diversified marketing strategy: About one third of their gross revenues are marketed to 15 retail stores and restaurants; the remainder goes to 15 wholesalers (20%), three Bay Area farmers’ markets (20%), and the farm’s Community Supported Agriculture program (20%).

A Feeling of Fulfillment Organic grower Andrew Brait talks about the path that lead him to Full Belly Farm.

After college, I worked for six years on small organic farms in Vermont. During a cold Vermont winter in 1990, I decided to thaw out a bit and started working at Full Belly Farm. In the spring of 1991, I returned to farm in Vermont but felt I had left a piece of my heart back on Full Belly. In 1993, I packed up my life and moved 3,000 miles west to become a partner in the farm.

I love the fact that I can pick and eat a couple dozen different crops at any given day of the year—from figs in the summer to carrots in the winter! Some of my favorite times are during “crop-walks” at dusk with my wife and kids, eating our way across the farm.

We have been selling at the Marin farmers’ market for 20 years. We grow over 100 different crops—vegetables, fruits, nuts, grains, hay, flowers, livestock, children and new farmers—creating a biologically diverse polyculture on our farm. Fairness, honesty, and right relations are all integral to our farm’s overall health. We try to “grow” all three of these elements—fiscal stability, ecological sustainability and social responsibility—into everything we produce.

We pride ourselves on producing the highest quality and freshest crop possible—if we wouldn’t buy it, we won’t sell it. If we are not wowed by flavor—why bother growing it?! All of our crops are freshly picked the day before the market. What we don’t sell is given to the local food gleaners or brought back to the farm and fed to our farm animals or put into our compost.

We are blessed with a favorable year-round growing season. Our mild wet winters and hot dry summers, deep fertile soils, and full-time crew enable us to farm from January to December. Picture a full flush of winter vegetables in every shade of green, veined in reds, golds and whites. Citrus trees dotted with orbs of juicy, sweet oranges waiting to help ward away the winter sniffles. The tender young green undergrowth is making its appearance after these recent rains.

We organic growers are always thinking about what to call ourselves. Since the “O” word has become a federally-defined term, organic agriculture has become increasingly more industrial. We could call ourselves a “biologically active, fermenting, sustainable polyculture family farm,” but it

doesn’t quite have the right ring to it. I’ve never considered farming any other way than as sustainable as possible.

The freshness, quality, and intimacy of the farmers’ market are unmatched. Nobody will talk your ear off about the nuances of flavor between a Suncrest and an O’Henry peach outside the farmers’ market.

Where else but at a farmers’ market will people want to tell you how their child, who never eats greens, devoured your kale and asked for more?

© 2006 Marin County Farmers’ Market Association

on the web For the complete interview, go to www.marincountyfarmersmarkets.org/index_13.htm.

solutions


Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) is an innovative form of marketing that bolsters small-farm economies by inviting members of surrounding communities to pre-purchase a farm’s bounty. Think of it as buying “organic farm futures.”

Every week for the past 15 years, Full Belly’s workers have prepared boxes of fresh pro-duce for direct distribution to “subscribers” living in Davis, Sacramento, and throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. The program has grown steadily over time and now boasts more than 650 members. Redmond adores the CSA system because it enables consumers to directly connect with farmers and also because it gives people the opportunity to appreciate the plea-sures of fresh, seasonal food. (CSA subscrib-ers also get to share the risks that farmers face when unexpected weather woes threaten the harvest.)

Full Belly is a family farm with a very extended family. The partners host kids camps and cooking classes, potlucks and farm tours and an annual two-day Hoes Down Festival in

October that draws 4,000 celebrants to the farm’s almond grove.

Full Belly’s internship program helps impart knowledge and build capacities among young adults and students drawn from as far as Chile. Apprentices live on the farm with the owners and their families and partici-pate in the farm’s unique com-

munity. Judith Redmond proudly notes that several of these apprentices have been inspired to continue farming as a career. Several former employees also have started their own small farms in the area—with mentoring and sup-port from the Full Belly owners. Full Belly also has assisted other farmers who have decided to “grow organic” and has convinced several local

ranchers to switch to rais-ing organic grass-fed beef.

“We grow farms and farmers as well as food,” says Redmond. “We’re creating a community of farms and they will grow more farms, which then build the market and do even more to educate the cities. It just doesn’t work if there are only one or two.”

Full Belly Farm, PO Box 251, Guinda, CA 95637, (530) 796-2214. For more information about CSAs and small organic farms as alternatives to the corporatization of organic production, see www.fullbellyfarm.com.

* “Striving for Social Sustainability in Agriculture,” The New Farm (Rodale Institute). August 3. 2004. www.newfarm.org/features/0804/workers.

Full Belly Farm enjoys a growing international reputation and frequently draws visiting eco-tourists from North America, South America, Europe, Asia and Africa. Photo: Full Belly Farm

solutions


The Non-Pesticide AdvisorPAN’s Guide to Alternative Pest Management

“It’s happened to all of us,” says Deanna McKinney of the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides, “You stroll into the kitchen and find ants marching all over your counter. Although it may be tempting to think the world would be a better place without these pesky critters, it’s important to keep in mind that ants play an important part in maintaining healthy ecosystems.”

Trying to eradicate ants is both impossible and unwise. Ants are hard-working eco-heroes. They help control other insect populations and keep soils healthy. Ants are among the most common insects on (and under) earth, with more than 12,000 species identified worldwide. And it’s humbling to remember that, despite the growth of human population, ants still outnumber people—by more than 160 million ants for every human.

Too many humans tend to think of insects as “pests” when, in reality, they are allies. Leave it to E. O. Wilson, the Pulitzer Prize-winning co-author of The Ants, to inject the proper note of humility. “Fifty million years before humankind began farming,” Wilson notes, “ants were already in the agriculture business.” Furthermore, “if all [humans] were to disappear, the world would regenerate back to the rich state of equilibrium that existed ten thousand years ago. If insects were to vanish, the environment would collapse into chaos.”

Still, our ant neighbors can be a real bother when they drop in unannounced. And that’s when you need…

on the web PANNA’s Pesticide Advisor offers useful tips on safely dealing with specific pest problems at panna.org/resources/advisor.dv.html. Also see NCAP’s website, www.pesticide.org.

A Pesticide-free Fix for an Ant EmergencySource: Central Contra Costa (California) Sanitation District

� Find what ants are after (usually leftover food) and where they are entering the room (usually through a crack in the wall). Mark it so you can find it again. If you can’t find an entry point, see Step 5.

� Don’t remove the food until after Step 3 because ants will scatter. They are easier to manage in a line.

� Clean up lines of ants with a vacuum, or spray ants with soapy water and wipe up with a sponge. Soap washes away the chemical trail ants follow.

� Next, block entry point temporarily with a smear of petroleum jelly or a piece of tape. Use silicone caulk to permanently close cracks in walls, along moldings and baseboards, and in gaps around pipes and ducts.

� If you can’t find an entry point, clean up the ants (Step 3). Place a nontoxic, gel-based bait station on the ants’ path. Always remove the bait station when the

line of ants has disappeared so you don’t attract more ants into the house.

� If ants are nesting in a potted plant, move it outdoors. Water it thoroughly and place it in a bucket filled with water that comes an inch below the rim of the pot. Using a stick, make a bridge for the ants to get out of pot and bucket without getting in the water. The ants will soon begin carrying their white-colored young to safety. When no more ants emerge, drain the pot and return it to the house.

Bonus Tip: Here’s a simple anti-ant trick from Richard “The Bugman” Fagerlund. Mix a paste of peanut butter (40%), jelly (40%) and boric acid (20%) and smear a smudge on a piece of stiff paper where sweet-eating ants will find it. Boric acid desiccates insects. Ants carry it back to their nest: takes time, works. It is toxic if ingested in large doses, so keep out of reach of chil-dren and pets.

solutions


Affiliates

Saskatchewan Network for Alternatives to Pesticideswww.snapinfo.ca

SNAP is committed to reducing the use of pesticides in Saskatchewan through

education, networking and research. “In Saskatchewan,” SNAP founder Paule Hjertass notes, “pesticides are easier to buy than alcohol, cigarettes or drugs.”

In 2004, Hjertaas circulated a petition to Saskatchewan’s Environment Minister ask-ing that pesticide reform be written into the Province’s “Strategy for a Green and Prosperous Economy.” More than 1,000 citizens and other organizations signed the petition and wrote letters demanding that children be protected from pesticides. That campaign marked the beginning of SNAP. Incorporated in April 2005, SNAP went right to work printing brochures, creating educational displays, and setting up classes on organic gardening and pesticide regula-tion.

SNAP stood up against timber giant Weyerhauser’s plan to spray the Porcupine-Pasquia Forest with glyphosate (Roundup®) and fought CropLife Canada’s plan to allow the pesticide industry to dominate the Province’s Integrated Pest Management (IPM) committee. SNAP reminded law-makers that the “proper definition of IPM includes pesticides only as a last resort, and starting with the least toxic ones.”

Closer to home, SNAP’s organic garden-ing classes show residents how to maintain healthy lawns and gardens without chemi-cals. SNAP is effectively using radio and TV interviews, petition drives and letters-to-the-editor to bring consumers, organizations and politicians together to create a pesticide-free Saskatchewan.

PANNA AffiliatesThe following groups have joined the PAN Network—either as new members, or by renewing their Affiliate membership. Thank you for your commitment and active involvement!

Affiliate with PANNA!Non-governmental public interest organizations in Canada and the United States are invited to become PAN North America Affiliates. For more information, contact our Affiliates Coordinator at [email protected].

on the web panna.org/about/affiliates.html

• Action for Clean Environment• Action Now• Agricultural Resources Center• Basel Action Network• Bio-Integral Resource Center• California Certified Organic

Farmers• Californians for GE-Free

Agriculture• Campaign for Pesticide

Reduction• Canadian Association

of Physicians for the Environment

• Canadian Environmental Law Association

• Center for Agroecology & Sustainable Food Systems (UC Santa Cruz)

• Center for Biological Diversity• Center for Reflection and

Action, Inc• Center on Race, Poverty and

the Environment• Citizens for Pesticide Reform• Colectivo Ecologista Jalisco• Community Alliance with

Family Farmers—Davis• Council on International and

Public Affairs• Ecology Action• Environmental Forum of

Marin• Equiterre• Farmworker Justice Fund• Farmworkers Association of

Florida• Florida Consumer Action

Network

• Food and Water Watch• Healthy Children Organizing

Project• Hilltown Anti-Herbicide

Coalition• Institute for Agriculture and

Trade Policy• Land Stewardship Project• Líderes Campesinas de

California• Marin Organic• Midwest Organic and

Sustainable Education Services• Corporation of Benedictine

Sisters• National Campaign for

Sustainable Agriculture• National Center for

Appropriate Technology• Non-Toxic Hotline• Occidental Arts and Ecology

Center• Oregon Toxics Alliance• Orion Magazine• Parents for a Safer

Environment• Pesticide Alternatives of Santa

Clara County• Reach for Unbleached!• Russian River Watershed

Protection Committee• Santa Clara Medical

Association• Saskatchewan Network for

Alternatives to Pesticides• Strategic Video/Strategic

Counsel• Yat Ktisichee Native Center


Pesticide Action NetworkPAN was launched in Malaysia in 1982 as a global network for eliminating trade and use of toxic pesticides. PAN has autonomous regional facilitating centers in Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, Latin America and North America. One of the main strengths of PAN International is the network of more than 700 NGOs with whom the regional centers collaborate.

AFRICA PAN Africa BP 15938 Dakar-Fann, Dakar, Senegal phone (221) 825 49 14, fax (221) 825 14 43 [email protected], www.pan-afrique.org

ASIA/PACIFICPAN Asia and the Pacific PO Box 1170, Penang 10850, Malaysia phone (60-4) 657 0271, fax (60-4) 658 3960 [email protected], www.panap.net

EUROPEPAN Europe c/o PAN Germany Nernstweg 32, D - 22765 Hamburg, Germany phone (49-40) 399 1910-0 fax (49-40) 390 7520 [email protected] www.pan-europe.info

LATIN AMERICARAPAL c/o Alianza por una Mejor Calidad de Vida (RAP Chile) Avenida Providencia N° 365, Oficina N° 41 Providencia, Santiago de Chile, Chile phone/fax (56-2) 341 6742 [email protected], www.rap-al.org

NORTH AMERICAPAN North America 49 Powell Street, #500, San Francisco, CA 94102 phone (415) 981-1771, fax (415) 981-1991 [email protected], www.panna.org

affiliates

Midwest Organic & Sustainable Education Serviceswww.mosesorganic.org

MoSeS is an educational and outreach organization that serves farmers striving

to produce high-quality, healthful food using organic and sustainable techniques. Most of the members of MOSES’ staff and board are active organic farmers. By supporting farm-ers, MOSES also helps to support economic growth and sustainability in local communities. Located in Spring Valley, Wisconsin, MOSES reaches out to farmers throughout the Midwest who are making the change from conventional to organic farming, as well as those who are already farming organic.

The group provides farmers with fact sheets on organic agriculture and hands-on education through their Organic University. Their “Help Wanted: Organic Farmers” campaign provides informa-tional packets to get people started in organic farming. Harriet Behar, a MOSES staffer and organic farmer who handles the “transition hotline,” says she receives about ten calls a week from producers interested in making the switch to organic production. MOSES is also encour-aging people to take action to improve the 2007 Farm Bill.

In February 2007, MOSES hosted the largest organic farming conference in the country. More than 2,000 farmers packed this annual event to enjoy a range of workshops, exhibitions, music, and, of course, great organic food. For farmers, present and future, MOSES is helping to lead the way to the Promised (Pesticide-free) Land—not only in the Midwest but also throughout North America. Check out the MOSES website for the latest organic farming information.


Help Yourself resources for a better world• “Loophole,” a February 2007

episode of the popular TV show, Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, focused on the U.S. EPA’s “Human Testing Rule,” which permits manufacturers to test pesticides on unsuspecting women and children. The episode was susggested by Martha Arguello of Physicians for Social Responsibility–Los Angeles. PAN’s Dr. Margaret Reeves consulted on the script.

• TEDX, the Endocrine Disruption Exchange, provides a “comprehensive, multidisciplinary database about the effects of chemicals on wildlife, laboratory animals, and humans.” The focus is on synthetic chemicals that disrupt the endocrine system, causing developmental problems in children. http://www.endocrinedisruption.com

• Beyond Pesticides has launched a Web database that provides online links to “current and historical information on pesticide hazards and safe pest management.” http://beyondpesticides.org/gateway/index.htm

• The Beloved Community, a film by Pamela Calvert, documents the personal tragedies—and defiant victories—of Native Chippewa residents of Sarnia, Canada, a once-prosperous petrochemical “boom town” now devastated by endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Today, two females are being born for every male . According to the filmmaker, this chilling syndrome has been observed in animals but its has never before been seen in a human population. Contact: [email protected].

• The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil is an inspiring film that charts Cuba’s transition from large farms sustained by petrochemical pesticides and fertilizers to small organic farms and urban gardens. Contact: Megan Quinn, The Community Solution, (937) 767-2161, [email protected].

• The Mouth Revolution. This hilarious “viral video” by Free Range Studios imagines what would happen if our taste buds staged a revolt against artificial, packaged food. PAN and Annie’s Homegrown are Web-linked partners in what’s been called “the greatest upside-down-mouth-movie in the history of cinema.” http://www.mouthrevolution.com

• Dangerous Combinations. PAN Germany has published a Position Paper on the Combination Effects of Pesticides (February 2007). “Why Risk Assessment Is Necessary for Substance Mixtures,” demands that authorities consider not only the risks of individual chemicals but also address the hazards that result from pesticides interacting with other chemicals. English language version at http://www.pan-germany.org/download/pan_position_combi_effects_0702.pdf.

ß

From “Loophole.” NBC’s Law & Order: Special Victims Unit

The Mouth Revolution by Free Range Studios for Annie’s Homegrown


Last Word

South Central Los Angeles has some of the highest crime rates, drug use, welfare populations, and fastest-growing HIV-positive infection rates—in

one of the richest cities, in the richest state, in the rich-est country in the world. Yet, in the midst of this toxic atmosphere, seeds are sprouting, organic gardens are thriving, and healthy, whole foods are becoming part of everyday life.

My name is Anna Marie Carter, but I am also known as “The Seed Lady of Watts.” I am a certified Master Gardener who practices direct action by building free, organic gardens for people who suffer from HIV/AIDS, cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure, and obesity.

My advocacy takes me to drug/alcohol/mental health facilities, community centers, schools, housing proj-ects, and shelters for women returning from prison. I teach people how to grow their own food, organically.

The environment in Watts is toxic. The air is polluted and community health is further jeopardized by the fact that much of the food in South Central is geneti-cally engineered, pesticide-laden, hybridized, and irra-diated—bagged, bottled, canned, boxed, and frozen. We do not even get food grown in California. Much of our food comes from countries in Latin America where pesticides banned in the U.S. are still used. This highly processed, low-quality food affects the physical and mental health of everyone here.

Years ago, I opened an organic vegetable, seed, and plant store on Crenshaw Boulevard. On the first day of business, three little boys standing nearby said “Good morning” and proceeded to set up the organic veg-etable and flowers stands. They were sent to me by a Higher Source. We planted tomatoes that grew over seven feet tall. The boys sold the tomatoes and used the money for school clothes and supplies. One paid his mother’s utility bills. They are grown now, but when-ever I see them, they kiss and hug and thank me.

I am currently working at the Watts Garden Club where children learn the “Value of a Seed” by traveling to gardens where they can plant the ingredients that

go into pesto, salsa, and coleslaw. We teach the chil-dren to invent recipes and design logos so they can sell their own food products. Participants in the “Made in Watts” class make their own natural bath soaps for sale to our community.

We run a Community Supported Agriculture project that provides farm-fresh produce to the neighborhood. We operate our own organic produce stand and farm-ers’ market. We train youth in agricultural entrepre-neurship, demonstrating how organic gardening creates value-added products.

The Club’s “Organic Greenhouse” teaches people to grow chemical-free lettuce, herbs, and flowers indoors and “The Kitchen” covers vegan and vegetarian cook-ing. We involve the community in garden construction and we network with other low-income communities of color.

It doesn’t matter how pretty you are, where you live, or how many degrees you have, because if you don’t

start saving this planet, soon you won’t have anywhere to live. Once we were taught about “Power to the People.” I have lived through that and I’ve learned that People are the Power.

Anna Marie Carter is founder and CEO of the Watts Garden Club, PO Box 19234, Los Angeles, CA 90019, (323) 969-4740, www.wattsgardenclub.org.

Seeds of Hope in South Central LAby Anna Marie Carter

Anna Marie Carter, the “Seed Lady of Watts”

More online at panna.org/magazine

NONPROFIT ORG.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDSAN FRANCISCO, CA

PERMIT NO 925

49 Powell Street, #500San Francisco, CA 94102

“Stewart follows a rose from the remote Ecuadoran greenhouse where it’s grown to the American retailer where it’s finally sold, and visits a huge, stock–exchange–like Dutch flower auction. These present-day adventures are interspersed with fascinating histories of the various aspects of flower culture, propagation and commerce.”

— The Washington Post

This issue is underwritten in part by the generous support of these sponsors.

Say Goodbye to Pesticides!

Together we can get toxic pesticides out of the environment, off our food, and away from our children.

Renew your PAN membership today. Basic membership starts at $35.

Donate $150 or more and you will receive an autographed copy* of Amy Stewart’s Flower Confidential: The Good, the Bad and The Beautiful in the Business of Flowers.

The New York Times called Stewart’s bestseller “engaging and scrupulously reported.”

Visit us at panna.org/renew to renew or donate online. Or use the envelope in this issue. Or call (415) 981-1771 ext. 309.

*available while supplies last

Documents

PAN North America - Pesticide Action Network...PAN North America Magazine Spring 2007 news a global ban. The bill also threatened states’ rights with radical preemption of health-pro-tective