4/7 Berkeley Council New Resolution hearing

[buggy]

Hi all,

Ouch! Computer confusion with trying to change from digest and then other life stuff... so hi again.

Help! Via the Berkeley Peace and Justice Commission we have our very strong resolution going before the Berkeley City Council this Monday evening, it turns out! It must have been pure exhaustion that caused me to be confused about how soon it would appear so this time it's not CDFA at fault for no notice, but me! At the end of this info, I will copy the resolution which will be changed only in format as per request, but not in content. We need you all to come, and if you cannot be there in person (or also) to email and call. Info included below.


While we had prepared it in the Whereas/ Therefore be it resolved format, BCC has recently asked for resolutions to be presented differently, more straightforwardly, in a few paragraph form. So we will take the content of the attached, put it into paragraph form of 1) Recommendations; 2) Background; 3) Current situation.

The Recommendations are that BCC oppose the USDA/CDFA pesticide program to eradicate the LBAM and that BCC demand that the USDA downgrade the pest classification of LBAM to reflect the lack of risk it poses.

This is, essentially, what the East Bay Regional Parks District union voted to pass Wednesday night, and they specifically added a preamble about safeguarding their rangers and other workers, and the people who use the parks, recognizing that this program has people scared and if it goes further will keep people home, inside, rather than out in the parks.

Part of the reason for pursuing this is to put the BCC appropriately on the spot to influence their leadership of the lawsuit. At the moment, they are focusing on the East Bay, and we want them to reflect that this is a statewide program and a lawsuit needs to reflect that we need to protect everyone in the state and that, we understand that we are not safe in the EB if the program continues unabated elsewhere.

TIME/LOCATION: Expected to be heard about 8 pm; at the North Berkeley Senior Center, 1901 Heart St., at Martin Luther King, Jr. Way, about a block North of University. Easy 10-minute walk from Downtown Berkeley BART station.

We need a lot of people there, and a lot of people calling and writing emails to support a no toxics stance. This could be of great importance in influencing the whole lawsuit. But without action now, they are VERY likely to weasel out of the stronger stance.

mayor@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
lmaio@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
dmoore@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
manderson@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
spring@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
lcapitelli@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
olds@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
kworthington@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
gwozniak@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
manager@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
attorney@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
publichealth@ci.berkeley.ca.us,
envhealth@ci.berkeley.ca.us,

Phone #'s below:


Berkeley (94702/3/4/5/7/8/9/10) http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/ population (2006): 101,555 Mayor Tom Bates (510) 981-7100 mayor@ci.berkeley.ca.us Councilmember Linda Maio (District 1) (510) 981-7110 lmaio@ci.berkeley.ca.us Councilmember Darryl Moore (District 2) (510) 981-7120 dmoore@ci.berkeley.ca.us Councilmember Max Anderson (District 3) (510) 981-7130 manderson@ci.berkeley.ca.us Councilmember Dona Spring (District 4) (510) 981-7140 spring@ci.berkeley.ca.us Councilmember Laurie Capitelli (District 5) (510) 981-7150 lcapitelli@ci.berkeley.ca.us Councilmember Betty Olds (District 6) (510) 981-7160 olds@ci.berkeley.ca.us Councilmember Kriss Worthington (District 7) (510) 981-7170 kworthington@ci.berkeley.ca.us Councilmember Gordon Wozniak (District 8) (510) 981-7180 gwozniak@ci.berkeley.ca.us City Manager (510) 981-7000 FAX: (510) 981-7099 manager@ci.berkeley.ca.us City Attorney (510) 981-6950 attorney@ci.berkeley.ca.us Public Health Division (510) 981-5300 FAX: (510) 981-5395 publichealth@ci.berkeley.ca.us Environmental Health Division (510) 981-5310 FAX: (510) 981-5305 envhealth@ci.berkeley.ca.us

Eradicate the CDFA and USDA and leave us alone already!

Max Ventura http://www.DontSprayCalifornia.org


RESOLUTION:

To: The ******** City Council or…..
From: East Bay Pesticide Alert / Don’t Spray California
Re: Resolution opposing the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) and the U.S. Department of Food and Agriculture’s (USDA) pesticide program to attempt to eradicate the Light Brown Apple Moth
Date: Spring,2008

Whereas, the Light Brown Apple Moth (LBAM) is a pest subject to Federal and State quarantine and eradication orders; and

Whereas, there is a claimed presence of Light Brown Apple Moth (LBAM) in Alameda County; and

Whereas, the CDFA plans to expand the LBAM pesticide program which began in 2007, to Alameda and surrounding areas in 2008; and

Whereas, pesticide applications have repeatedly been shown in the past to cause unintended, sometimes unpredictable, and often serious human health effects; and

Whereas, pesticide applications have repeatedly been shown in the past to upset natural ecosystem balance in sometimes unpredictable and often catastrophic ways; and

Whereas, botanists and entomologists have testified that pheromones, pesticides, and even sticky traps may threaten non-target organisms, including similar yet not fully understood moth species whose importance in the ecosystem is not yet fully understood; and

Whereas residents, workers, students and visitors to Berkeley, and people around the world, have recognized that the CDFA and USDA have manufactured a crisis and claimed an emergency exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in order to aerial spray without conducting an Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and

Whereas, the state has confirmed that it will produce an EIR after the resumption of aerial and ground pesticide applications; and

Whereas, the use of toxic chemicals results in reliance over time on more chemicals; and

Whereas, exotic plant experts, Dr. Daniel Harder and Jeff Rosendale, have testified and reported that purported damage attributed to the LBAM in New Zealand occurred only prior to 2001, and once the pesticide regime was stopped, the LBAM ceased to be a problem as LBAM predators which had been killed by pesticides were allowed to regenerate and keep the LBAM naturally-controlled; and

Whereas, according to the Hawai’i Department of Agriculture, the LBAM is not considered a significant pest but may even be considered beneficial, as a control measure for invasive gorse and blackberry; and

Whereas, biologists have testified that the LBAM is unlikely to be eradicable; and

Whereas, UC Davis entomologist James R. Carey has testified that the range over which LBAM has been detected in California indicates that it has been established in the state for some time; and

Whereas, the CDFA has stated that no physical crop damage has been attributed to LBAM; and

Whereas, the risk of economic damage alone does not justify the health and environmental risk of pesticide applications; and

Whereas, farmers have suffered economic damage not due to the presence of the LBAM on their farms, but due to the damage caused by the State’s demands of extensive handling of delicate crops in search for the LBAM; and

Whereas, Organic farmers have suffered economic damage due to CDFA interfering with, and further diluting, Organic industry standards by allowing synthetic chemically-treated crops to continue to be labeled Certified Organic, resulting in consumers seeking produce from outside of application zones; and

Whereas, nursery owners have suffered economic damage not due to the presence of the LBAM in their nurseries, but due to temporary closure during and after pesticide applications, and the threat of permanent closure for refusal to comply with the pesticide program’s pesticides protocol; and

Whereas, the CDFA has stated that, residents cannot refuse pesticide applications at their homes and properties; and

Whereas, hundreds reported health problems following pesticide applications, including headaches, gastro-intestinal pain, rashes, reproductive system irregularities including post-menopausal resumption of menses, asthma attacks and difficulty breathing, including respiratory arrest in an eleven month-old baby; and

Whereas, sicknesses reported were consistent with expected effects of ingredients of pesticides applied; and

Whereas, CDFA has not addressed the synergistic effects of combined chemicals, most of which are kept undisclosed, protected as “proprietary” by trade secret laws, are frequently far more toxic than the active ingredients, and are specifically designed to interact synergistically to achieve greater toxicity than any chemical by itself; and

Whereas, the pesticides that are part of this program are associated with gastro-intestinal illness, are harmful if absorbed through skin, are neurotoxic, carcinogenic, endocrine-disrupting, chromosome-damaging, cause damage to the immune and central nervous systems, hearing and memory loss, leukemia, genetic damage, and are associated with birth defects; and

Whereas, the pesticides that are part of this program are toxic to beneficial insects such as bees, ladybugs, parasitic wasps, including the Trichogramma (which is part of this program), non-targeted moths, as well as fish, oysters and other marine mollusks, a wide variety of other aquatic organisms, birds, cats, other mammals, and even plants; and

Whereas, other environmental impacts following pesticide applications were reported, such as the death of pets who died of identical symptoms to their affected guardians; and

Whereas, birds and honeybees disappeared for lengths of time after pesticide applications from gardens they frequented previously; and

Whereas, a red tide developed, more dramatic than any in the area in at least 40 years, blamed on surfactants consistent with inert ingredients in pesticides, resulting in the death of hundreds of birds; and

Whereas, pilots employed by CDFA to apply pesticides mistakenly sprayed outside of designated application zones; and

Whereas, the California Constitution guarantees the right not only to retain, but to obtain, health; and

Whereas, The Nuremberg Code, Directives for Human Experimentation, states that human experimentation without consent is illegal; and

Whereas, complicity in the commission of a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle Vl of the Nuremberg Principles is a crime under international law; and

Whereas, claims of safety of synthetic chemicals classified as pesticides is illegal, but CDFA persists in calling some of the pesticides used in this program safe; and

Whereas, the burden of proof of safety must reside with the pesticide manufacturers; proponents; executors; and applicators; and

Whereas the State has relied almost entirely on its own scientists to address concerns about the LBAM pesticide program and has not employed independent, outside experts to evaluate and support the program nor address issues in a direct and impartial manner; and

Whereas Emeritus Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology Richard Philp testified that the USDA and EPA documents “are suggestive of a poor understanding of basic pharmacological and toxicological principles”; and

Whereas the City of Berkeley has embraced the Precautionary Principle and passed a Resolution to the effect; and

Whereas the City of Berkeley has a long history of commitment to avoiding pesticide use, which is reflected in their pesticide ordinance; and

Whereas, CDFA insists that local governments have no control over this program’s implementation; and

Whereas, the people residing within and visiting the boundaries of those local governments depend on protection by elected representatives; and

Now, therefore be it resolved and ordered that the ******* City Council opposes the USDA/CDFA pesticide program to eradicate the LBAM; and

Now, therefore be it resolved and ordered that the ******* City Council demands that the USDA downgrade the pest classification of LBAM to reflect the lack of risk it poses.














Documentation for Resolution opposing the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) and the U.S. Department of Food and Agriculture’s (USDA) pesticide program to attempt to eradicate the Light Brown Apple Moth


Pheromone Search - 942 Monterey County Moths - Lancelot Houston: “Non-target” moth species in Monterey County, affected by the CDFA’s supposedly “targeted pheromone
http://eastbaypesticidealert.org/Pheromone%20Search.pdf

Pheromone Trap Colour Determines Catch of Non-target Insects - New Zealand Plant Protection Society
http://ww.nzpps.org/journal/53/nzpp53_216.pdf

LBAM Status report from New Zealand by Dr. Daniel Harder and Jeff Rosendale - March 6, 2008 http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/member ... tFINAL.pdf

Buckwheat study showing that flowering buckwheat sown in grape fields, attracts parasitic wasps and other beneficial insects, and extends the food supply of insect predators of the LBAM caterpillar, by days to over a month, also extending their effectiveness in managing the moth http://www.vineyardshop.com.au/modules/ ... D=TVSN0337

List of natural enemies of the LBAM http://www.hortnet.co.nz/key/keys/info/ ... a-enem.htm

Hawaii Department of Agriculture Press Release in response to USDA quarantine – May 2007 – LBAM beneficial in some cases
http://www.lbamspray.com/00_Documents/2 ... ulture.htm

UC Davis entomologist James R. Carey statements regarding eradicability
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=61
Dr. Carey’s Presentation to the State Assembly Legislature Committee on Agriculture – March 2008
http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/member ... _LBAM2.pdf

Organic’s Organics - on the natural food industry seeking organics grown outside the spray zones
http://www.metroactive.com/metro-santa- ... -0750.html

Blue Bamboo nursery forced to close http://www.bohemian.com/metro-santa-cru ... -0726.html

Full report of 2007 health complaints including survey of impact on homeless residents of Monterey and Santa Cruz http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2008/01/ ... compl2.pdf

No Spray Zone overview of Btk – used to hose down neighborhoods and private gardens
http://eastbaypesticidealert.org/No%20S ... %20Btk.PDF

Toxicological profile for Btk by Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides http://www.pesticide.org/btk.pdf

Isomate LBAM Plus Twist Ties – manufacturer’s MSDS - “Harmful if absorbed through skin” – 250 per acre, 40 per property – low hanging in easy reach of children
http://www.pacificbiocontrol.com/Light% ... S-LBAM.pdf

Dangers of Permethrin Fact Sheet by Caroline Cox – to be painted on minimum of 3000 utility poles and trees per square mile http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/Permethrin.htm

Most recent toxicological profile for Permethrin http://eastbaypesticidealert.org/Permet ... Review.htm

USDA quarantine exemption request to use a new chemical, which has not been registered by the EPA. This is the “pheromone”, the “active” ingredient in CheckMate, the synthetic “pheromone” used in aerial applications. http://eastbaypesticidealert.org/USDA%2 ... equest.PDF

Most recent indepth toxicological profile for CheckMate http://eastbaypesticidealert.org/Checkm ... Safety.htm

Toxicological profile of Chlorpyrifos by NCAP – forced on nurseries http://www.pesticide.org/chlorpyrifos.pdf

Chlorpyrifos Fact Sheet by Chemical Watch and Beyond Pesticides
http://www.beyondpesticides.org/pestici ... yrifos.pdf

Unidentified Inert Ingredients in Pesticides: Implications for Human and Environmental Health - Cox and Surgan http://www.ehponline.org/members/2006/9374/9374.pdf

Moss Landing Mystery Spill – Discussion about what killed the birds that washed ashore
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=83

CDFA letter to property owners of areas sprayed accidentally http://www.ksbw.com/download/2007/1103/14501006.pdf

Nuremberg Code – Directives for Human Experimentation - relevant to CheckMate, the synthetic “pheromone” containing pesticide, which has been untested on humans, and therefore its use over human population constitutes experimentation without consent. http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/nuremberg.html

Declaration of Richard Philp, toxicology professor, for county of Santa Cruz suit http://eastbaypesticidealert.org/philp.html

[jenny]

One more issue to be covered could be the polyurethane/polyurea microcapsules that supposedly deliver the chemicals from the airplanes to the ground. Just think of the environmental difficulties in trying to clean those up, and the damage they do to our water, etc. What's the point in banning plastic bags if we're just going to coat everything in plastic anyways?