Subject: Please Enforce Existing Food and Agriculture Law 6614-------
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 05:08:35 -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
cc: Christine Whitman whitman.christine@epa.gov
Dear Mr. Helliker,
I thought you might like to read an e-mail I just received from the
California Ad Hoc Committee for Clean Water entitled:
Enforce Existing Food and Agriculture Law 6614 that Protects the Public
Against Pesticide Overspray.
Our existing State Agricultural Code protects persons,
animals and property from contamination by toxic chemicals used in
agriculture. Yes, the Department of Food and Agriculture is charged with the
responsibility to protect us from irresponsible use of chemicals. We are
protected by law from excessive residues in our food (yeah, well, sort of) and
we have statutory protection against contamination of our property by our
neighbors' pesticide use. But the statutes are NOT being enforced. The Ad Hoc
Committee for Clean Water argues that we do not need new regulations, just
enforcement of what already exists and to quit swallowing the baloney we are
being fed.
6614 is a section of the Food and Agriculture Code that
states unequivocally that we are protected from pesticides wafting in through
our bedroom windows. No, it does NOT say close the window and leave your
house. No it does NOT say tough
tarts toots, prepare to accept it, you live near ag land. It says that a
grower can have pesticides applied to his own property, BUT... and it's a BIG
BUT... he MUST evaluate "surrounding properties to determine LIKELIHOOD
of HARM or DAMAGE". And that
..."NO PESTICIDE APPLICATION SHALL BE MADE OR CONTINUED WHEN (1)
"THERE IS A REASONABLE POSSIBILITY OF CONTAMINATION OF THE BODIES OR
CLOTHING OF PERSONS NOT INVOLVED IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS" and (2)
"THERE IS A REASONABLE POSSIBILITY OF DAMAGE TO NONTARGET CROPS, ANIMALS,
OR OTHER PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY".
Can they spray you anyway? Of course. People rob banks
even though it's against the law. They rollerskate on the sidewalk, smoke in
the non-smoking area, exceed the speed limit and run red lights. The question
is ENFORCEMENT. In Sonoma County, we see little to NO ENFORCEMENT of pesticide
spray law 6614. You'll get a ticket for driving 26 mph in Sebastopol in a 25
mph zone, but pesticides can blow over and contaminate your property all day
long while the Ag Commissioner and the Environmental District Attorney
(believe it or not, we have one) do nothing about it.
6614 says pesticide applications shall not be continued
if "there is a reasonable possibility of contamination" of others.
It does NOT say 'ought not', 'would not' or 'might not' be continued. It says
"SHALL NOT". It does NOT say stop when there is 'certainty' of
contamination; and it does NOT say stop if the non-targets are 'certain' to
get cancer, drop dead, have an asthma attack or severe allergic reaction that
must be documented by a letter from a physician! It says the spray SHALL STOP
if there is a REASONABLE POSSIBILITY of CONTAMINATION of non-target people,
crops, animals or property. What more could we want?
(May I politely suggest some real
regulation?)
What we need is a change, a change in OURSELVES such that
we NO LONGER PUT UP WITH THE LACK OF ENFORCEMENT... NO LONGER TOLERATE THE
BALONEY THAT "YOU'RE JUST SMELLING THE 'CARRIER' OR THE 'PROPELLANT'
excuse dished out by the Ag Commissioner's office when people call in
complaining about strong odor of pesticides on their property. Puleese, what
is the "carrier" molecule carrying? Or the 'propellant' propelling?
Why, the toxic pesticide, of course. What proof do they have that the
'carrier' is harmless, or that it dropped its cargo and is now an empty
suitcase? Odor is put in natural gas so that we smell a gas leak and know to
take action. In this case, the action to take is to stop a pesticide
application whose smell or material encroaches upon us because the grower's
right to use pesticides stops at my and your property line. He must not
discharge a pesticide onto our properties without our consent.
So get cracking. Policy is made by those who show up and
speak out. Say nothing, you get nothing. Big pressure is on the Department of
Agriculture from the pesticide companies. It's time we turn up the heat and
advocate for ourselves. If we don't who will? Gallo? Monsanto? Bayer? Dow?
If you want the full text of Code 6614, check out http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/inhouse/calcode/030201.html#6614.0
and look up Title 3. Food and Agriculture; Division 6. Pesticides and Pest
Control Operations.
Well Mr. Helliker,
Jackie Robinson once noted: "Life
is not a spectator sport...If you're going to spend your whole life in the
grandstand just watching what goes on, in my opinion you're wasting your
life." I would like to add
that as the person in charge of the Department of Pesticide
"Regulation" you are wasting your life (in my opinion) if you do not
start to PROTECT the people of California from the "NORMAL"
drift/contamination your "registered" POISONS always have and always
will generate. How you can
continue to pretend that your "registered" POISONS can be applied
without a REASONABLE POSSIBILITY of CONTAMINATION of non-target people, crops,
animals or property, is beyond me. There is no way that your "registered" POISONS are
not CONTAMINATING non-target people, crops, animals or property.
This can be easily proven any day you wish, the REAL problem is and
always has been, what are you going to do about it?
Respectfully, Stephen
L. Tvedten
If you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing
information on pesticides, Email Us.
with "subscribe" in the subject line.
Click Here to Add Comment