Letter to Paul Helliker of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation
It is my understanding that you will only allow the members of the general public to use unregistered alternatives to control pest problems. It is also my understanding that you and the Department of Pesticide Regulation consider it against the law for any grower or pest control professional to use anything but a registered pesticide to control pest problems.
Previous Current Articles Next
September 6, 2001
Paul Helliker
Director of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation
Dear Mr.. Helliker,
It is my understanding that you will only allow the members of the general public to use unregistered alternatives to control pest problems. It is also my understanding that you and the Department of Pesticide Regulation consider it against the law for any grower or pest control professional to use anything but a registered pesticide to control pest problems. If I do not hear from you in the next 5 working days, I will take your lack of response as an agreement to the above items.
We had a discussion by phone months ago about inerts. You stated you were concerned and would get back to me about the actual safety testing required for inerts and active ingredients combined. It is my understanding that there are about 100 safety tests on the active ingredients and only 3 on the full product. You have not replied. A response is still requested to be accompanied by the above response. Please also send me the description of all required pesticide testing that tests the full product including the inerts.
This law restricting the use of safe alternatives by professionals may establish a clear discriminatory act against people's civil rights to be safe and have access to their home and community. One concern is that some GWSS work plans include the public's right to use alternatives, and there are no suggestions or guidance on how to be successful with alternatives. I also understand that no non-toxic alternatives for pesticides are approved for use for GWSS pesticide applicators. For those of us who are part of the 100 million Americans with chronic health diseases that are not protected by any government safety standard, we have to have a non-toxic alternatives available for our entire communities. We need pest control applicators that can use them approved and are paid for by CDFA for GWSS community infestations. Not all of us are knowledgeable or due to disability physically able to apply any product for pest control, including the safe alternatives.
Regarding GWSS, we need immediate clarification on whether the State of California will require a sick and dying bed-ridden pesticide poisoning victim, or other disabled person sensitive to chemicals, to be burdened personally because they are the only person who is allowed to apply alternatives to their property. Currently, if they fail to control the insect CDFA will forcibly come on to their property to spray poisons that may kill or harm them. Therefore, I request an immediate decision by appropriate state legal counsel on this issue. There is a legal conflict and I believe the federal disability rights would prevail.
Regarding "softer less toxic pesticides" when you consider that the toxicity is unknown on the full product, due to the lack of complete inert ingredient protection, it is impossible to determine what is safe. People have had life-threatening asthma attacks due to inerts in the safer pesticides. Why, because asthma (or any other illness) is not protected by any government standard. EPA epidemiologist, Dr. Jerome Blondell stated that "Anyone not in perfect health is of course at risk."
GWSS has come to San Luis Obispo County where a lot of very sick people have relocated from other parts of the state and country. Also in the north, there are pockets of people near the coast, in Sonoma, Alameda, and other counties. The Canaries Foundation, Inc. No Acceptable Risk Coalition is building every day without advertising, people from all over are signing up. Still we wait for some protection for all the people in this state, including the healthier ones, against the "JUNK PESTICIDE SCIENCE" that is endorsed by our state and nation.
I am also concerned about the CA Healthy Schools Act and SEPA. Will safe alternatives not be allowed to be used by the schools because schools are public entities and often hire pesticide applicators, therefore requiring the use of registered poisons? My son can not go to school because of pesticides and other chemical exposures. I consider that this regulation if true is a violation of federal law concerning disabled access to public buildings and his rights to access an education.
I use beer in slug traps to control snails and slugs in my garden, if my school or city uses beer are they breaking the law? I hardly think any beer manufacturer would bother registering beer as a pesticide. I use chewing gum to control gophers, which works adequately. Is chewing gum against the law for schools and cities to use? Shouldn't the state explore and test these common every day products to test the effectiveness of being an alternative to pesticides in order to make recommendations for alternatives when the public health is at risk?
As the EIR for GWSS continues, doesn't the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) require the use of alternatives? Are the only acceptable alternatives for all government projects always required to be registered poisons? CEQA Under section 21002 states: "The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives, or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects."
As you can see this issue of the use of alternatives is critical to legislation currently going through our government. The public needs to be informed on this issue.
I have forwarded this letter on to my email lists with the hope others will also raise this concern.
I have copied this letter to Bob Wynn the Director of the Pierce's Disease Control Program and request that he send this email to Secretary Lyons and the Secretary's Pierce's Disease Advisory Task Force.
Sincerely,
Linda J. McElver
GWSS Environmental Task Force- non governmental public health representative
President
Canaries Foundation, Inc.
PO Box 3253
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-3253
(805) 547-1568
If you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing information on pesticides, Email Us. with "subscribe" in the subject line.