Daily News Archive
Favors Pesticide-Free Zones on Some West Coast Salmon Streams
"It makes no sense to keep poisoning salmon in our rivers while trying to protect them," said Glen Spain, Northwest Regional Director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, one of the plaintiff groups. "Requiring minimal buffer zones is a logical step toward restoring a billion-dollar salmon-fishing industry to our region."
U.S. District Court Judge John Coughenour plans to have the new protections in place in time for next spring's farming season. His order is expected to push back pesticide use along hundreds of miles of waterways that harbor salmon and steelhead runs protected under the federal Endangered Species Act. Salmon streams with healthy runs would not gain the protection.
The restrictions have jolted regional farm groups and national pesticide-industry groups that have intervened in the case. But just how far the rollback will go - and what chemicals it will cover - has yet to be determined.
The Seattle Times reported that Judge Coughenour directed the Environmental Protection Agency, environmental groups and industry representatives to try to negotiate the terms of an order that he expects to issue following the end of this year's fall crop season. These will be high-stakes negotiations.
A U.S. Department of Agriculture study submitted to the court stated that the measure could trigger crop losses in Washington and Oregon of more than $100 million annually if a 20-yard buffer - the minimum sought by environmentalists for many pesticides - were put into effect for 54 pesticides. Federal agricultural officials admitted that these losses represented a worst-case scenario, with farmers opting to tear out fruit trees in the no-spray zones and unable to gain any compensation payments from the federal government. Roughly 85 percent of the projected losses would be in Washington, primarily in vegetable and fruit farm areas east of the Cascades.
Judge Coughenour, in an earlier ruling, found that the EPA had failed to comply with Endangered Species Act requirements to assess the risks that as many as 54 pesticides pose to salmon. And he embraced no-spray buffers of up to 100 yards for aerial spraying and 20 yards for ground spraying as a good starting point for developing the new restrictions.
"This is huge,"
said Patti Goldman, an attorney for Earthjustice, a non-profit public
interest law firm that represents the plaintiffs. "Under the normal
way of doing business, nothing happens until the evidence is so strong
that it knocks you over."