Steve Tvedten of Get Set, Inc.'s email to Lyndon Hawkins of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation .

Questions have been asked of the California Department of Pesticide Control since Fontana Unified School District declined to consider a pesticide free IPM program because of the Department of Agriculture's opinion about only utilizing registered pesticides to eliminate pests.  The California Department of Pesticide Regulation has remained silent and not responded to these issues:

Subject: Public Health Debate
       Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 10:42:51 -0400
       From: Rosalind Tvedten <stvedten@earthlink.net>
 Organization: Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)
         To: Lyndon Hawkins <hawkins@empm.cdpr.ca.gov>
 

Lyndon, I thought you might like to read the Sunday, July 25, 1999 article on Agricultural Viability, Public Health Shape a Debate Commissioner's Priority Should Be Concern for People (I have added a few comments).
 

In January the Ventura County Board of Supervisors postponed the reappointment of our county's agricultural commissioner for six months. As noted in The Times' editorial ("Leadership Role Critical," June 27) that probationary period will end Tuesday. Supervisors and The Times have received letters supporting and opposing reappointment of W. Earl McPhail.

Supporters have tended to be from established agricultural organizations. A repeated concern they voice is that supervisors not give in to political pressure from special-interest groups and the environmental community.

As a board member of Community and Children's Advocates Against Pesticide Poisoning (CCAAPP), I'd like to bring a face to at least a portion of the opposition to Mr. McPhail's reappointment.  Our organization is a grass-roots, all-volunteer one that exists to educate the public about the dangers of the overuse of pesticides (poisons). We are parents and grandparents, teachers and former farm workers, who have seen firsthand what health problems can result from pesticide (poison) exposure.  We have researched the issue using documents obtained from the pesticide overseers--the county agricultural commissioner's office and the state Department of Pesticide Regulation--to get past the rhetoric and obtain the facts.

We speak for those who go through life trusting that their health and safety are foremost in the minds of their public officials:

The mother and her year-old daughter who were accidentally  sprayed with chlorpyrifos while driving along an Oxnard Street.  Told by the agricultural commissioner's office that it was "just water," she learned only after her husband had her car tested that she had missed the opportunity to be treated for the poisoning symptoms she exhibited. Now she, her daughter and the child to whom she gave birth three months after the incident are on a much longer probation than Mr. McPhail's, waiting to see what long-term health problems they may suffer.

The veteran teacher who was transferred from Rio Mesa High School after needing a medical leave of absence, and who is still suffering serious, long-term health consequences from what she and her doctors believe to have been repeated overexposure to pesticides (poisons) after only six years on the Rio Mesa campus.

The students at Mound Elementary and Balboa Middle schools who were exposed to Agri-mek sprayed high into citrus trees across the street as they walked home from school.

All of these incidents, and many more, were reported to the office of the agricultural commissioner by concerned citizens. In those investigated--including the last mentioned, which occurred only two months ago--no fines were levied, no buffer zones were increased and no steps were taken to notify students or parents to prevent accidental exposure from recurring.  Recently the supervisors approved $127,500 in additional funds to the agricultural commissioner's office, and are considering funding four more positions for pesticide enforcement. But without a major change in policy, CCAAPP believes Mr. McPhail's office will continue to neglect the protection of public health, which is as much a part of his mandate as is the promotion of agriculture. (Or the promotion of "registered" poisons.)

It is not our farmers and growers whom CCAAPP holds ultimately responsible for the dangers we face from the millions of pounds of pesticides used in Ventura County each year. We know that most of the agricultural community does its best to follow application instructions and regulations. But the chemical companies, like their counterparts with interests in tobacco, tirelessly promote their products (poisons) while refusing to acknowledge the long-term consequences of their use. They put us all--homeowners, growers and farm workers alike--at risk.

Many ask why, if pesticides are unsafe, more of us are not ill?  The answer is we are, especially our children. One of every 600 youngsters born today can expect to be found to have cancer by age 10. The application instructions recommended by the pesticide producers and the Department of Pesticide Regulation are based on what is considered a "safe" exposure level for healthy young adult  males. If these chemicals can be safely used:

Why has the rate of testicular cancer in 19- to 29-year-old men increased 68% over the past 20 years?

Why did the death rate from asthma increase 78% from 1980 to 1993?

Why has the diagnosis of childhood cancer increased steadily each year for the past 20?

To his credit, Mr. McPhail is among the first to say that children do not belong near agricultural activities involving pesticides.  "These are toxic chemicals," he has said. "They are designed to kill, and that's what they do." But given that reality, Mr. McPhail's office routinely issues permits for the use of the most toxic chemicals (POISONS) near schools, requiring no more than the minimum precautions and buffer zones, and failing to require notification of parents, students and faculty.His record speaks for itself. His tenure has been characterized by lax enforcement, the levy of infrequent, negligible fines and denial of  the validity of parental concerns about the dangers of exposure. He has been cautioned and has improved before, only to backslide when the pressure was released. What assurance can supervisors give us that this pattern will change?

There are several things parents and community members can do to minimize exposure of our children to toxic chemicals:
 

Educate yourself about the long-term health risks of chronic low-level exposure to toxic chemicals for infants and children.

Ask your school administrators to implement a nontoxic pest-management policy.

Request on your children's emergency medical information card that you be notified before and after any pesticide use on or adjacent to school grounds, including nearby fields.

Support local growers who use least-toxic and nontoxic methods to produce food, and buy organic whenever you can.

Close your windows and vents when driving near fields or orchards that are being sprayed or irrigated. Most pesticides are distributed in water.

Finally, talk with your neighbors and friends in the farming community about the corporate sources that assure them that pesticides can be used safely. Remember, for years the tobacco industry asserted that there was no evidence of danger to health from cigarette smoke.  (It is also against the federal law to say any labeled use of any "registered" pesticide poison is "safe".)  A nation that can put a man on the moon surely can figure out a nontoxic way to grow food. But until we do find alternative techniques and products, our only protections against the current  chemical flood are knowledge of the long-term risks and strict enforcement of the regulations overseen by the agricultural commissioner's office.

We implore Supervisors John Flynn, Susan Lacey, Kathy Long, Judy Mikels and Frank Schillo to be certain that the agricultural commissioner they appoint will give top priority to public health. We  understand that agriculture is the economic engine on which Ventura County runs, but we believe it is long past time that all of us learn what health risks our communities endure for the bounty that brings billions of dollars into the coffers of the state and millions into the cash boxes of pesticide (poison) producers each year.  The price is too high if we must be poisoned in our homes, schools and fields to obtain it. There is a better way, just waiting for us to find it.

           Copyright 1999 Los Angeles Times. All Rights Reserved Sunday, July 25, 1999
 

Agricultural Viability, Public Health Shape a Debate Integrity and Objectivity of Critical Office Are at Stake By ROBERT P. ROY

The residents of Ventura County are blessed with the best of both worlds--a vibrant economy and a delightful place to live. Important to the economic vitality and beauty of this area are the productivity and vast open spaces provided by our agricultural base.  The people of Ventura County have clearly voiced their desire under the Save Open Space and Agricultural Resources (SOAR) initiative to maintain the viability of agriculture in this area. To do so, however, a balance must be achieved between urban interests and the need for agriculture to remain economically competitive in a global marketplace.

What we don't need is to politicize the office of the county agricultural commissioner. Neither public interests nor the interests of agriculture are served if regulatory enforcement and rule-making are fanned by the politics of fear and innuendo.  For our almost $1-billion agricultural industry to survive, we must be globally competitive. Our local agricultural industry is one of the most progressive and regulated industries in the United  States.

Not only are local growers some of the most productive to be found anywhere in the United States, they are also on the cutting edge of many progressive farming practices. For example, the   Fillmore Protection District is a global model for the use of beneficial insects in lieu of pesticides, an approach called integrated pest management (IPM).

Whenever possible and where economically feasible, the industry is attempting to utilize IPM practices. Agricultural chemical usage is also meticulously overseen by a state regulatory system that is implemented by the county agricultural commissioner and his professional staff. State and federal laws governing the use of chemicals in agriculture are the strictest in the world. These laws have been developed based on sound science and are subject to constant review by the state Department of Pesticide Regulation, the California Environmental Protection Agency, the federal EPA and legislative overview. Because of the small size of Ventura County relative to other major agricultural areas of the state, coupled with the close interface between agriculture and urban interests, the county is among the most publicly scrutinized production areas in the state.

The recent methyl bromide controversy has focused attention on local agriculture and the enforcement of statewide methyl bromide application rules. It has spawned a host of attacks by advocacy groups upon the chemical, local farmers and the integrity of Ventura County Agricultural Commissioner Earl McPhail.

Activists are attempting to intimidate the Board of Supervisors individually and collectively into not reappointing the current agricultural commissioner but appointing someone more to their liking. The true issue in this public controversy is the integrity and objectivity of the agricultural commissioner's office. The environmental community is attempting to politicize the office of agricultural commissioner to achieve regulatory goals not grounded by sound science or supported by state or federal environmental agencies. (Is it really "sound science" to simply ignore all of the risks, contaminates, transformation products, resistance, "inerts" and/or safer alternatives?  And, why are all the farmers going bankrupt?)

It is unfortunate that Mr. McPhail has become the unwilling poster child for the environmental community's campaign against  pesticide usage. If Mr. McPhail has a flaw, perhaps it is that he has  failed in reaching out to such groups and others to educate them about the role of his office and the manner in which public safety is protected in Ventura County.  Having said that, in almost 22 years of representing agricultural employers in this county I have yet to hear of a single instance in which the agricultural commissioner deviated from the strict enforcement of pesticide usage or other regulatory laws. As one industry observer astutely noted, "A beef with the law should not be confused with a beef with the ag commissioner."

The Ventura County Agricultural Assn. suggests that the environmental community's attack on the use of agricultural chemicals by attempting to politicize the office of the agricultural commissioner is not in the public interest. The need for an individual with Mr. McPhail's personal integrity, experience and knowledge of production agriculture, as well as knowledge of regulatory standards, is paramount if the needs of the farming community and the public at large are to be served.  The Board of Supervisors must not be drawn in by political activists who, through fear, misinformation and innuendo, are attempting to manipulate not only public opinion but also    scientifically based policies adopted by state and federal agencies.  The Board of Supervisors should fully reinstate Earl McPhail as Ventura County Agricultural Commissioner.

Robert P. Roy Is President and General Counsel of the Ventura County Agricultural Assn

                      Copyright 1999 Los Angeles Times. All Rights Reserved

Lyndon, according to Mr. Roy you now may be allowing Californians to use true IPM, and may now be allowing the use of safer, unregistered poison alternatives to control pest problems.  Is this finally true?  Your Department has repeatedly said that it was only "legal" to control pests in California with "registered" poisons.  Is it really finally "legal" (in your opinion) to wash your can in California? - and in so doing kill the flies and maggots with unregistered soap and water?  If this is true - someone had better tell the nurserymen they no longer have to flood their plants with dangerous termiticide poisons like chlorpyrifos to "prevent" fire ants.  You might also tell the public that dishwater kills killer bees better and safer than any "registered" poison.  If it is not true, someone had better tell Mr. Roy that the continual use of "registered"poisons is not true "IPM" nor is it "sound science" nor will it "protect" anyone or anything - including the crops.

Respectfully,  Stephen L. Tvedten.