Pesticides prompt public debate
Click Here to Add Comment
Subject: Pesticides prompt public debate-----
Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 21:35:19 -0500
From: Stephen Tvedten <steve@getipm.com>
Organization: Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)
To: Paul Helliker <phelliker@cdpr.ca.gov>
Director, State
of California, Department of Pesticide Regulation
Dear Mr. Helliker,
I thought you might like to read an article that appeared Monday,
November 27, 2000 entitled: Pesticides prompt public debate - by Michael Lau,
Calgary Herald.
Environmentalists calling for a near ban on bug and weed
spraying by the parks department are expected to square off in a heated debate
Wednesday with city officials.
The meeting of the operations and environment
subcommittee will include more than 100 opponents of city pesticide use, said
Barb Kinnie, of the Sierra Club of Calgary.
"There are a lot of people concerned about this
issue -- there are a lot more people who want to be there but can't be because
they have to work," Kinnie said of the open meeting, which starts at 9:30
a.m. in council chambers.
"They've set aside a huge space because they know
this is a heated issue."
Pesticides have been linked to chemical sensitivities,
reproductive problems and cancers such as breast cancer, prostate cancer and
non-Hodgkins lymphoma, she said.
"It's really hard to make a definitive, conclusive
argument that says pesticides are the only cause.
"But what we do know is that it is the chemical soup
that people are exposed to. There are so many chemicals and we know not all of
these chemicals are safe and we know pesticides are in that group of
chemicals."
Equally important, Kinnie said, are the environmental
impacts of pesticides.
"They're affecting our water, soil and air -- and
the chemicals persist in the environment. They persist because they don't
break down the way natural things
do."
However, Todd Reichardt, director of the city's
integrated pest management program, said the link between pesticides and
health problems is weak at best. (Here
is another guy who obviously thinks "IPM" is an acronym for
"Include Pesticides Monthly".)
"There is almost nothing there in terms of the
relationship between the use of pesticides and some of the cancers that people
are talking about," said Reichardt.
"If you remove genetics, environment, diet,
lifestyle, smoking, alcohol, driving and stress, it's tenuous."
Nonetheless, the city is trying to reduce the potential
risk, said Reichardt.
"We do spot treatments, we use products that are
deemed relatively safe by the federal government, we try to go with very
specific products, products that are selective for certain weeds."
The city gives extensive notification to communities by
telephone and signage, he said.
"I'm not aware of any other city in Canada that goes
to the lengths we do to notify homeowners about our intent to do
spraying." (Too bad, they
will not go to lengths to find safe and far more effective alternatives.)
Ald. Jon Lord said the issue is rife with conflicting
viewpoints.
"I want to ensure we're presented with factual, not
emotional, information, a balanced discussion, a recognition there are not
only two sides to every coin and that it's not a fear-mongering kind of
discussion," said Lord, who chairs the subcommittee.
The committee has received more than 100 letters on the
issue, he said.
In 1997, Calgary parks and recreation used 7,577 litres
of liquid pesticide (POISON) and 16,212 kilograms of solid pesticide (POISON).
The Sierra Club is demanding the city:
* implement a 95-per-cent reduction of pesticide use
within three years, with a minimum reduction of 50 per cent in the first year.
* take dandelions off the "noxious" weed list.
The designation now means the city can force removal of dandelions, which
normally leads to spraying.
* implement an aggressive public education program to
educate homeowners on the dangers of pesticides and of safer alternatives.
Source: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/stories/001127/4945786.html
Well Mr. Helliker, when will you implement an
aggressive public education program to educate homeowners, farmers and pest
control operators on the dangers of your "registered" POISONS and of
safe and far more effective (unregistered) alternatives?