The
Sustainable Use Of Pesticides
Pesticides
and Herbicides are known as Plant Protection Products in Europe.
There is plenty of confusion in the UK, and Italy, and France, and
the entire European Union as to allowed, banned, and Candidate For
Substitution alternatives. But the concept of the “Sustainable Use
Of Pesticides” is fact, and written into law. From the EU Pesticide
Database: The Sustainable Use Of Pesticides - Click on “National
Action Plans” for Member States.
The 77
Candidates For Substitution (Allowed Active Substances)
The
process of comparative assessment and substitution by Member States
is expected to contribute to the use of plant protection products
that require less risk mitigation and of non-chemical control or
prevention methods. Overall it contributes to a more sustainable use
of pesticides as foreseen by Directive 2009/128/EC. In the longer
term, comparative assessment and substitution provide an additional
incentive for the pesticides industry to further innovate and develop
active substances and PPPs with less hazardous properties.
After
1 August 2015, Member States Authorities are required to apply
comparative assessment to new applications for authorization, renewal
or extension of use of a PPP containing a CfS. The publication of the
CfS list does not have an impact on existing authorizations and does
not trigger an immediate review of existing authorizations. On 1
August 2015, the overall process of comparative assessment and, where
appropriate, substitution (see above) will start for new
applications. However, it must be emphasized that:
-
The active substances which meet the criteria for CfS remain approved
active substances.
View
Active Substances legal info:
The
effort to cease the use of toxic compounds across 28 Member States
has been a long quarter century struggle. There are updates for
August 2015.
The
European Commission is required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 (‘the
Regulation’)
to
establish a list of substances identified as “candidates for
substitution” (CfS). The list
identifies
active substances with certain properties. For plant protection
products (PPPs)
containing
these active substances, Member States will be required to evaluate
if they can be
replaced
(substituted) by other PPPs.
From
the EUROPEAN COMMISSION - HEALTH AND CONSUMERS DIRECTORATE-GENERAL “The
European Commission is required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 to
establish a list of substances identified as “candidates for
substitution”. The list identifies active
substances with certain properties.
For
plant protection products (PPPs) containing these active substances,
Member States will be required to evaluate if they can be replaced
(substituted) by other adequate solutions (chemical and
non-chemical). To prepare such a list, the Commission requested a
consultant to prepare a report on the implementation of the criteria
set by the Regulation. The report does
not contain any official listing,
but presents
different
options
drawn from possible interpretations of the criteria.
Member
States and stakeholders were consulted on the approach taken and on
the input values taken to determine if an active substance qualifies
to be a candidates for substitution. The information is grouped in a
comprehensive
database
that will be
updated on a regular basis. The current draft list contains
77
candidates for substitution.
In
the UK, Imazapyr didn't make the list:
Approval
Of Ative Substances, The List of 77 Approved CfS, Current Procedures
Go
to bottom of page to view PDF documents
Under
the Heading of Information and Raising Awareness is “Relevant
National Links:
For
each Member State shown, a PDF document loaded with links is provided
categorized and well organized to assist in establishing a framework
for Community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides.
In
short, Imazapyr is not allowed on the European Marketplace for sale.
It
is however available under an Essential Use Exemption. Non-essential
use of pesticides refers to the use of pesticides for aesthetic
reasons, primarily to maintain lawns and gardens. Essential use of
pesticides refers to the use of pesticides to protect public health,
protect forests against insect infestations or protect agricultural
products from adverse impacts.
Exemptions
abound even with the use of neonicotinoids. Previous research had
found that the three pesticides; clothianidin, imidacloprid and
thiamethoxam, posed an environmental risk when used as seed
treatments or granules, prompting the European Commission to limit
their use from Dec. 1, 2013. The use of the three neonicotinoid
substances in seed or soil treatments is prohibited in the European
Union for crops attractive to bees and for cereals other than winter
cereals except in greenhouses. The European Crop Protection
Association, which represents the European pesticide industry, has
said the research was flawed.
NEW
- A legal challenge has been launched on a British decision to allow
some farmers to use neonicotinoids after London won an exemption from
the EU restrictions. Those demanding greater protection for bees
stress the insects' economic value. Some 75 percent of crops traded
on the global market depend on pollinators and the value of
pollination in Europe is estimated at 14.6 billion euros.
“Some
things start good and go bad. Somethings start bad and stay bad. John
Trudell
Even
going back to the 2003 Directive which listed 320 chemicals for
removal from the marketplace, Imazapyr remained available for
Essential Use (exemption), as did Atrazine.
Pesticide
Bans In The United States Of America
“In
1979, Mendocino County, California was one of the first local
jurisdictions in the country to pass a pesticide ordinance, in this
case prohibiting the aerial application of phenoxy herbicides, such
as 2,4,5-T. The measure was passed after an incident in 1977 that
resulted in herbicide drift on school buses nearly three miles away
from the application site. A California State Supreme Court decision
upheld the right of citizens to adopt more protective standards than
the state and federal government. (The People v. County of Mendocino,
1984) The California legislature then adopted legislation to preempt
that right. The issue of federal preemption of local ordinances made
its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled in 1991 that federal
law (the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, FIFRA)
does not preempt local jurisdictions from restricting the use of
pesticides more stringently than the federal government. (Wisconsin
Public Intervenor v. Ralph Mortier) However, the ability of states to
take away local authority was left in place. The pesticide lobby
immediately formed a coalition, called the Coalition for Sensible
Pesticide Policy, and developed model legislation that would restrict
local municipalities from passing ordinances regarding the use or
sale of pesticides on private property. The Coalition lobbyists
descended upon states across the country, seeking and passing, in
most cases, preemption legislation that was often identical to the
Coalition’s wording.”
“Explicit
Preemption. Twenty-nine states have nearly identical preemption
language that explicitly preempts localities from adopting stricter
legislation that would regulate the use of pesticides. Most states’
preemption clauses read similar to the American Legislative Exchange
Council’s (ALEC) Model State Pesticide Preemption Act.” It
states, “No city, town, county, or other political subdivision of
this state shall adopt or continue in effect any ordinance, rule,
regulation or statute regarding pesticide sale or use, including
without limitation: registration, notification of use, advertising
and marketing, distribution, applicator training and certification,
storage, transportation, disposal, disclosure of confidential
information, or product composition.” Escerpted from: Pesticides
and You, Vol. 33, No. 3, Fall 2013.
Maryland
is one of seven states that does not prohibit local governments from
enacting protections from pesticides that are stricter than state
laws.
Montgomery
City Council Members in May 2015 “asked that hospitals in our
County assume a leading role in increasing awareness of the health
concerns regarding pesticides by voluntarily agreeing to eliminate
their use on hospital grounds.”
According
to the letter, “There are strong signals from leading medical
professionals that there is a fundamental need to reduce the amount
of pesticides to which individuals are exposed.” Efforts behind the
county bill and this latest request for hospitals to limit toxic
pesticide use are driven in large part by concerns that have been
raised by concerned residents, as well as the medical community about
the potential negative impacts of exposure to pesticides on human
health.
In
addition to this new request, the Council is considering
“The Safe Lawn” Bill
52-14,
“The
Safe Lawn” Bill was introduced
last fall and
would limit the use of non-essential pesticides on County lawns,
certain athletic playing fields and County-owned public grass areas
Council President Leventhal is the lead sponsor of the bill that is
considered a landmark ordinance that would protect children, pets,
wildlife, and the wider environment from the hazards of unnecessary
lawn and landscape pesticide. The bill is supported by Safe Grow
Montgomery, a local coalition of individual volunteers, organizations
and businesses, working to prevent exposure to chemicals that
run-off, drift, and volatilize from their application site, causing
involuntary poisoning of children and pets, polluting local water
bodies such as the Chesapeake Bay, and widespread declines of honey
bees and other wild pollinators.
Now
that's grassroots.
The
corporate industrial solution by the application of Imazapyr
leaves Dead Standing
Trees, in forests intentionally killed, which
have no ecological function, threatening
fire hazards to local communities.
How a tree dies is critical to it's use through the decay stages –
whether standing or on the ground. It's size is important living or
dead. Tan Oaks are a
magnificent species. Tanoaks
can form dense, sometimes nearly pure stands in early succession but
is typically overtopped by conifers decades later, often becoming
dominant in the subcanopy. Conifers regain dominance about 70 years
after logging on mixed-evergreen sites in northern California. A
24-year study on a productive northern California site found tanoak
seed production was more consistent than that of associated
California black oaks (Quercus
kelloggii) and
Pacific madrones. Tanoak production was mostly light.
Tanoak acorn production in a heavy seed year ranged from 220,000 to
420,000 sound acorns/ha. Annual number of acorns/tree can range from
3,900 to 110,000. Mean annual production of tanoaks between 18 and 24
inches (46-61 cm) in DBH is estimated at 3,900 to 4,600 acorns.
Studies in Oregon and northern California found over 99% of tanoak
acorns were consumed (Thornburgh 1994).
Mendocino
Redwood Company has a glossy PR coating, convincing
even Greenpeace. In
it's Case
Study
number 04, “FSC AT
Work” of the Forest
Stewardship Council Certification of MRC, actually states: 1)
Abiding by FSC’s Principle 6, Mendocino Redwood Company (MRC)’s forest
management plan prohibits logging of the endangered northern spotted
owl (Strix occidentalis
caurina) habitat, 2) As required by FSC Principle 6, MRC explored
alternatives to a minimal
use of Imazapyr, and carefully weighed environmental concerns
including not using the herbicide in watercourse protection zones.
MRC plans to phase out the use of the chemical by 2020.
Again:
“As required by FSC Principle 6, MRC explored alternatives to a
minimal
use of Imazapyr, and carefully weighed environmental concerns
including not using the herbicide in watercourse protection zones.”
“MRC
lists the amount of chemical usage on its website, monitors chemicals
in the water table, doesn’t use the herbicide within the
watercourse protection zones, and plans to phase out the use of the
chemical by 2020. As a result of local concerns, certifying body SCS
published a thorough discussion of the use of Imazapyr and found that
MRC retained adequate levels of tanoak in areas treated with the
chemical and that, for the most part, MRC’s use of the chemical did
not present a non-conformance with relevant FSC indicators. The
certifying bodies did, however, issue a Minor Corrective Action
request to ensure that a MRC employee with a chemical application
license
would be present during the Imazapyr applications 100% of the time,
and that MRC provides additional training to ground crews.”
Footnotes:
Mendocino Redwood Company, Key Policies: Herbicides 2013.
Available at:
additional
footnotes:
Grady,
Brendan, Scientific Certification Systems (2012) op cit., p 18.
Citation:
Greenpeace – April 2014 FSC At Work Case Study number 04
Actually
Mendocino Redwood Company had no input or consideration to make
regarding the use of Imazapyr near watercourses, riparian zones,
stream banks, or wet areas - New York and California are the only two
States that prohibit Imazapyr's use near watercourses, riparian
zones, stream banks, or wet areas. This can be found on the label and
MSDS for Imazapyr.
MRC
states in it's THP's under “Cumulative Impacts” that “no
herbicide use is not a feasible option”. Their argument is based on
a scenario of loss. MRC fears losing 30 percent to 70 percent of
growth in a location in one year. But loss of growth doesn't mean
anything. The highest growth rates occur when trees are real young
and there is no merchantable volume. Sounds like an inverse
proportional statement to Cumulative Mean Annual Increment of growth
– where the growth rate is minimal, but growth
in terms of volume as a
percent of inventory is huge.
MRC
has adaptively managed it's data to certified
newspeak green
leveraged heights for Redwood Certification.
And
my favorite Greenpeace endorsement:
“To
meet FSC’s requirement for well managed forests, MRC uses a
silvicultural method called “variable retention” which retains 10
percent
to 50 percent
of the original tree stands.” “MRC’s
conifer inventory has increased by 41 percent over the initial
inventory in its 15 years of operation.”
Under
MRC's Option A, (the rules the company authored for itself as the
Option A allows under the FPR), it receives a bonus for each use of
Variable Retention. That 10 percent and 30 percent or 50 percent is
calculated at one and one half times
the actual
acreage and board feet
towards total landscape wide inventory (HCP area). So they take 3
percent of landscape out for roads, and multiply these minor
aggregate stands
of what's left by 150 percent and voila... conifer inventory is
recovering quickly, but only in the columns and ledgers. (Aggregate
Retention stands are what they are called under Variable Retention)
By invoking
the 'Copyright Disclaimer' Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act
1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as
criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and
research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might
otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips
the balance in favor of fair use."
§ 107.
Limitations on exclusive rights- Fair use: Notwithstanding the
provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted
work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or
by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as
criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple
copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an
infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a
work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be
considered shall include (1) the purpose and character of the use,
including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for
nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted
work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in
relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of
the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted
work.
If you or
anyone wish to use copyrighted material from this article for
purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain
permission from the copyright owner.
Tomas
DiFiore
