A Year in Review—2021

• FIFRA Reform: Protect America's Children from Toxic Pesticides Act (PACTPA). Beyond Pesticides continues to engage with efforts to enact comprehensive FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and the Rodenticide Act) Reform. The Protect America’s Children from Toxic Pesticides Act was jointly introduced by retired U.S. Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) and U.S. Representative Joe Neguse (D-CO). Beyond Pesticides signed on in support, but noted that the bill did not represent the sort of comprehensive, systemic reform that is necessary to truly impact the way pesticides are approved in the U.S. We are working up a document and additional material that will further support our position, as well as present reasonable amendments to this bill that would improve its impact and further energize the grassroots. Conceptually, much of our perspective is contained in our piece “Advancing Foundational Change” in the Coronavirus issue of Pesticides and You. While much can be achieved administratively, legislation is needed to codify the principles we are advancing so we can institutionalize change and not be subject to the discretion of different administrations. If we cannot convince either Rep. Neguse or whomever will be the new Senate sponsor [Senator Corey Booker] to add these changes, we will look towards other elected officials. We are glad that important conversations are occurring around FIFRA reform.

• Save America’s Pollinators Act (SAPA) 2021. We continue to advocate for the passage of SAPA, which was reintroduced by U.S. Representatives Blumenauer (D-OR) and McGovern (D-MA) during Pollinator Week. We collaborated with NRDC to update the legislation in anticipation for a potential Senate version, but have yet to receive word on this due to coronavirus delays. Our updates made were incorporated into this latest version of the House Bill. The newest bill language improves the standard to which the proposed Pollinator Protection Board (PPB) regulates toxic pesticides, making determinations on whether the pesticide presents a hazard, based upon the potential to cause harm, including injury, illness, or damage to honey bees, and other pollinators, or pollinator habitat. This language would set pesticide regulation more in line with the precautionary approach taken by the European Union and other international bodies. We participated in a virtual lobby day with Friends of the Earth, Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, and regional organizations. We are urging the new chair of the House Agriculture Committee to schedule a hearing on the bill.

• Saving New Hampshire’s Pollinator’s Act – HB646. Beyond Pesticides continues to fight for the passage of HB646. We remain in close contact with State Rep. Sofitikus (D), who has championed this and other progressive legislation in New Hampshire. The bill was assigned to a member of the Agriculture Committee to conduct its study session over last summer, however, the Covid crisis resulted in postponement. With Republications in the majority, a straight party-line at the end of September resulted in a decision not to move the legislation in the 2021 session. While waiting for possible movement after the next election, there is interest from other members of the Ag committee to make changes to the structure of that state’s pesticide review board.

• Rhode Island Neonic Bill.  The Rhode Island Audubon contact Beyond Pesticides after they heard our testimony at a Massachusetts' Pesticide Board hearing on neonicotinoids. We did provide input and our vision for strong comprehensive state pesticide legislation. The initial bill included a broad and a complete outdoor ban on neonicotinoid insecticides, but was amended in committee to a consumer ban and was recently voted out favorably and is set for a floor vote.

• New Mexico Neonic Bill. As part of our efforts to work in New Mexico, we connected with friendly NGOs at Xerces and Defenders of Wildlife who are working on legislation to protect pollinators in the state. The NM bill would have been the strongest pollinator act in the country as it would ban the use of neonics on any flowering, pollinator-dependent crops. The legislation, pushed forward by the Senate President, made it through several rounds of committee hearings, which Beyond Pesticides testified in support of, and made it to the Senate floor. Unfortunately, the bill was defeated by a narrow margin—18-20. This is unlikely to be the end, however, as there is now a strong coalition in the state that will continue to push the legislature toward safer practices for New Mexico’s unique and threatened desert pollinators. 

• Nevada Neonic Bill. Our opportunity to weigh in on a pollinator bill in Nevada came about through our relationship with the Toyabe chapter of the Sierra Club. They were in contact with a lawmaker, who we provided our model policy to. Ultimately, the bill had long odds, but lawmakers failed to take a strong stance by fighting for broader protections, and the bill died in committee in any case. Although Nevada is a relatively liberal state, there will need to be significant efforts put into changing minds of state legislators in order improve pollinators protections.

• Virginia Neonic Bill. Virginia’s pollinator legislation is an interesting case for a state where liberal lawmakers have control of the legislature for the first time in decades. The draft version of this legislation would have required some limited restrictions around neonic use, and neighbor notification procedures, but also included a provision rolling back state pesticide preemption by affirming local authority for communities to restrict pollinator-toxic pesticides on private property. We suggested an amendment that would allow communities to restrict more pesticides than just neonics, as a broad range of pesticides are toxic to pollinators. Although that amendment was accepted into the original introduced version, it was struck down soon after the lawmaker took a meeting with industry stakeholders. The bill was subsequently weakened into a study bill, that was to be run by industry. Then, this version of the bill was ultimately voted down in an extended session in the state Senate. We are pleased that this weaker version was voted down, and hope to return to these efforts in VA during the next legislative session, where we will continue to push lawmakers around the angle of pesticide preemption, given the opening provided with the originally introduced version.

• Maine Neonic Bill. Beyond Pesticides has worked to engage with as many pieces of pollinator protection legislation introduced. In Maine, advocates at the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association (MOFGA) identified the need for a landscaper to highlight how neonics were not necessary. Beyond Pesticides board member Chip Osborne provided expert testimony to Maine lawmakers about the hazards associated with neonic use in grub control, and the benefits of alternative management practices. Maine ultimately passed, and the Gov signed, what is now the strongest neonic restrictions of any state – eliminating all outdoor uses, with exemptions for agriculture and invasive species.

• Massachusetts Neonic Bill. Legislation banning retail neonic sales has been in limbo for years due to the Massachusetts Speaker of the House determination that because it did not have unanimous support, it would not receive a vote. This year, the bill received more cosponsors than it did the previous year, boding well for the effort. Beyond Pesticides testified in favor of the legislation, and it did make its way through its first committee, but was ultimately voted down. However, the issue was revived through the MA Department of Agriculture and Pesticide Board and, as a result of significant public pressure, MA became the first state in the country to make neonics restricted use through a regulatory process. This effort is a testament to the strong coalition of advocates that are actively engaged in efforts to reform pesticide use in MA. Despite constantly coming up against roadblocks and delays, Northeast Organic Farming Association (NOFA)-MA can still find ways to pack meeting rooms and zoom calls with passionate advocates.

• Sulfoxaflor Litigation. Beyond Pesticides has joined with Center for Food Safety and Conservation Law Foundation in a suit aimed at cancelling uses of sulfoxaflor, after legal action failed to stop the Trump administration from registering this bee-toxic pesticide. Unfortunately, this case remains in the courts because the Biden administration has decided to defend the previous administration’s allowance to use this next-generation, bee-toxic neonicotinoid.

• Massachusetts Mosquito Legislation and Coalition. The organization has been substantively engaged in efforts to reform state mosquito control laws in Massachusetts. As a result of the coalition’s work, we were able to achieve significant improvements to accountability and transparency, establishing a ‘21st century mosquito task force’ that we will monitor with the coalition. The MA mosquito coalition continues to meet on a bi-weekly basis to discuss the latest with mosquito control in the state and has begun to take a broader look at other pesticide-related issues and bills that are under consideration by state lawmakers. We have also worked on cutting edge stories, like PFAS contamination in pesticide products throughout the supply chain. We believe that this broad coalition of roughly a dozen groups can be a force for systemic change in the state, as it we advocate for stronger pesticide reform laws in the MA legislature.

• Model Mosquito Policy. As a part of the compromised mosquito legislation in Massachusetts, local communities are required to establish their own mosquito plan in order to be allowed to opt-out of state spraying. Although state regulators are tasked with providing guidance to local communities on this issue, we are not waiting on that in order to move forward. To that end, Beyond Pesticides has put together a model mosquito management policy for communities. Two versions of the policy were created—one that allows adulticiding, but provides opportunity for a community-led task force to disapprove a planned application, and another that charges that same task force with determining whether adulticiding is appropriate in the first place. A section-by-section analysis was produced for each document. Our goal is to have communities in MA adopt these policies as an opt-out from state spraying. As we continue to update our mosquito webpage, we will publish this policy as part of our new content.

• Maui County Pesticide Bill. The Maui County Council passed our organic land management bill on February 2021. The law prohibits the use of all synthetic pesticides and fertilizers on all county property, including parks, roadways and the county golf course.  This will affect all three islands in Maui County; Maui, Lānaʻi and Molokai.  Two votes in front of full council are required for it to become law, and it is expected to pass with a veto-proof majority.  The ordinance takes effect one year from passage, with an exception for the golf course, which has three years to transition. Beyond Pesticides spent years building support for this bill, educating the departments on organic land management practices and pesticide alternatives useful for roadsides, such as steam machines, mechanical mowing equipment, weed mats, etc. The bill was widely supported by environmental groups, marine scientists, and the Hawaiʻi Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

• Hawaiʻi County Glyphosate Bill. In 2019, Hawaiʻi County Council passed a bill prohibiting the use of all synthetic herbicides on county-owned lands, including parks and roadways. The bill was vetoed by the mayor and failed the vote to overturn the veto.  In 2020, Beyond Pesticides staff and board members visited Hawaiʻi County to conduct organic land management training for the Parks Department and demonstrate the use of steam equipment for weed management along roadways. This council session, Council Member Villegas is introducing a bill that would prohibit the use of glyphosate products on county-owned lands, as this may be more politically viable. We have worked with the (new) Parks Director to ensure that funding for herbicide alternatives is included in the coming budget, and to get this matter referred to the Climate committee as well so we can use this as a springboard for more holistic land management discussions.

• Washington State Sewage Sludge Legislation. Beyond Pesticides worked with Darlene Schanfald of Sewage Sludge Free WA/Sierra Club WA on a draft of policy approaches to address the use of sewage sludge in composts. Darlene received word from her local Congresswoman of interest in drafting a scoping document outlining various policy positions that could be worked up for future legislation. We recommend a law that prohibits using the term natural/organic/ecofriendly on fertilizer labels, and include a warning label on products that contain sewage sludge. We also provide a proposal to prohibit the use of sewage sludge on all food crops. Corollary proposals would ban all consumer sales of sludge and prohibit all sludge applications on arable land.

• Atrazine, Simazine, and Propazine Registration Review; Draft Endangered Species Act Biological Evaluations [EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0514] – February 18, 2021

  The Draft Endangered Species Act Biological Evaluations each for atrazine, simazine, and propazine released for comments comprehensively assess potential risks that all registered uses for the respective chemical may pose to an individual of a listed species or designated critical habitat. The Biological Evaluations encompass the review of all the registered uses and any agreed-upon changes from the technical registrants, and the approved product labels and mitigation measures for all pesticide products containing the specified chemical. However, we note that the evaluations do not consider potential risks of combined or additive exposures for a given chlorotriazine herbicide with other chlorotriazines or pesticide products in nearby or overlapping treatments or possible tank mixes. Such combined exposures with possible additive or synergistic toxicities could substantially elevate the likelihood of adverse effects to a given listed species and/or critical habitat. Therefore, we urged the agency to move swiftly to complete its final registration review decision and revoke the registration of these compounds due to the high-risk findings and demonstrated adverse impacts as reported in the completed Interim Registration Review Decisions.

• Glyphosate Registration Review; Draft Endangered Species Act Biological Evaluations [EPA-HQ-OPP-2020- 0585]—March 21, 2021

  Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used herbicide, and according to EPA, 281 million pounds of glyphosate are used just in US agriculture, and glyphosate is sprayed on 298 million acres of crop land each year. The Draft Endangered Species Act Biological Evaluation for glyphosate identifies virtually all listed species and critical habitats as likely adversely affected by its use, mostly from the non-agricultural uses. ESA §7(a)(2) consultations with the Services are therefore mandated to confirm whether listed species are indeed in jeopardy from continued use of glyphosate containing products. We urged the agency to move swiftly to complete its final registration review decision and severely restrict the registration of glyphosate products due to the high-risk findings and likely adverse impacts to listed species.

• Pesticide Registration Review: Proposed Interim Decision for Pentachlorophenol, Case 2505 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0653]— May 18, 2021

  In this Proposed Interim Decision, the agency recommended the cancellation and phase-out of all registered products containing pentachlorophenol. We supported this long overdue action that will now bring the U.S. into conformance with the Stockholm Convention banning pentachlorophenol and other persistent organic pollutants (POPs) joined by over 150 countries but never ratified by the U.S. We further recommend that the “phase-out” be immediate rather than unnecessarily protracted. There is one troubling aspect to the agency’s decision as stated in the PID, namely the supporting factor listed for the agency’s decision being based on the “uncertain future of pentachlorophenol production”. Whether a manufacturer or proponent for continued registration of a chemical exists should be irrelevant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) statutory requirement for registration that evidence exists to demonstrate the chemical will not pose an unreasonable risk. The available evidence for pentachlorophenol in contrast clearly demonstrates the opposite, the continued use of this chemical does pose unreasonable risks and should not be registered. We not that it ss fine if a registrant voluntarily requests cancellation of their registration, but it is the responsibility of the agency to move forward with cancellation after due diligence if the registrant has failed in their burden to satisfactorily demonstrate such registration will not pose an unreasonable risk of adverse effects.

• Pesticide Registration Review: Proposed Interim Decision for Creosote, Case 0139 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0823]; Chromated Arsenicals, Case 0132 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0349]; and Dichromic Acid, Case 5012 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0243]—May 18, 2021

  These comments recommend that the agency immediately suspend the registrations of creosote, CCA-C, and dichromic acid until the numerous ecological effects and exposure monitoring data requirements identified have been submitted and fully assessed. We note that there is a lack of data pertaining to risks posed by these chemicals weighed against the purported benefits are reasonable given the many existing alternatives. Further, we urge the agency to immediately cancel the registrations of the two chromated arsenicals ACZA and ACC. Data within the proposed interim decision (PID) for these chemicals indicate almost no use of ACZA and ACC was recently withdrawn from the American Wood Protection Association (AWPA) Book of Standards for use as a preservative. The PID also lacked consideration of adverse effect risks for these compounds. We concluded that, under the statutory requirements of the Federal Insecticide Fungicide Rodenticide Act (FIFRA, it is unreasonable to continue the registrations of ACZA and ACC. Similarly, we recommended the agency cancel creosote oil and coal tar registrations because these active ingredients were not assessed in the creosote PID and there are no currently active product registrations containing these ingredients.

• Proposed Interim Decisions on amicarbazone (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0400), aminopyralid (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0749), endothall and its salts (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0591), fluoxastrobin (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0295), ipoconazole (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0590), metconazole (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0013), prometon (EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0068), pronamide (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0326), propargite (EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0131), prothioconazole (EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0474), pyrasulfotole (EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0391), and spiromesifen (EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0263)—June 22, 2021

  The Propose Interim Decisions (PIDs) and our comments outline many serious adverse effects caused by the 12 pesticide compounds within the decision. In deciding the reasonableness of the risks, we suggested EPA must balance them against risks presented by other systems. We note that it is possible to raise the crops in question without toxic pesticides because organic farmers do. We conclude that the serious adverse effects identified in these PIDs are therefore unreasonable unless EPA’s mitigation measures will eliminate them. The mitigation measures proposed in the PIDs are inadequate, as they impact human, animal, and environmental health.

• Proposed Section 3 registrations for new products containing the active ingredients Bacillus velezensis strain RTI301 and/or Bacillus subtilis strain RTI477 – July 12, 2021.

  EPA proposed a review of new products containing the active ingredients Bacillus velezensis strain RTI301 and/or Bacillus subtilis strain RTI477.The database concerning the active ingredients and the products containing them is not complete. One of the proposed end-use products contains the insecticide bifenthrin. Even if the risks to these products are relatively low, as claimed by EPA and the registrant, they are greater than the known alternative, organic production. In deciding the reasonableness of the risks, EPA must balance them against risks presented by other systems. We know that it is possible to raise the crops in question without toxic pesticides because organic farmers do it. The adverse effects identified in this proposal are therefore unreasonable unless EPA can eliminate them. Inaddition, we also note the lack of endocrine disruption screening, thus overlooking associated health concerns.

• Public Participation for Ipflufenoquin, new active ingredient for use on pome fruit and almond –July 12, 2021

  EPA proposed registration for the new active ingredient ipflufenoquin. We note in the comments to EPA that ipflufenoquin’s relation to quinoline compounds demonstrates the potential toxicity of the chemical. Furthermore, the chemical is a fungicide and we asked EPA to  consider that fungicides have greater association with latent diseases, such as cancer, and exposure to quinoline compounds can induce carcinogenic tumors. Thus, ipflufenoquin has the potential act similarly. Therefore, we suggested EPA should reject and prohibit registration of ipflufenoquin for fungicide use. An adequate assessment must include an evaluation of the potential adverse effects cited in this document in relation to underlying conditions and comorbidities that exist in these communities, with specific attention to each potential health outcome and its potential disproportionate effect on people of color.

• Pesticide Registration Review: Proposed Interim Decision for Pentachlorophenol, Case 2505 –August 27, 2021

  Beyond Pesticides and the Ecological Rights Foundation commented on the Proposed Interim Decision (“PID”) for pentachlorophenol (“PCP” or “penta”). Although the comments were past due, there were a number of other commenters in this Docket have submitted comments beyond the comment deadline, which have apparently been accepted by EPA as part of this Docket. The sampling data submitted in this comment letter has not been provided by any other commenter in this Docket and therefore will be beneficial toEPA in considering the issues involved in the PID, primarily the human health and the environmental impacts of PCP. This letter provides field data on the actual discharge of contaminants from treated wood utility poles treated with PCP. This data was gathered during site inspections of Pacific Gas & Electric (“PG&E”) and other utility service centers that house stacks of new penta-treated wooden utility poles, and bins for penta-treated wood waste, in outdoor areas where they are exposed to stormwater. Dioxins, PCP, and various metals (copper, arsenic, iron, and zinc) are discharged from penta-treated utility poles when they are exposed to stormwater.

• EPA Draft Biological Evaluations for Imidacloprid, Clothianidin, and Thiamethoxam –October 25, 2021

  EPA proposed Interim Registration Review Decisions for the neonicotinoid insecticides imidacloprid, clothianidin, and thiamethoxam issued in 2020. However, the agency made no final endangered species finding nor human health or environmental safety findings associated with the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program. Furthermore, we note that EPA recognized the many serious health and ecological risks of concern associated with the uses of these neonicotinoids, but asserted the remaining serious risks after the adoption of all proposed mitigation measures are outweighed by the benefits of their use. We ardently disagree with this assertion as the benefits are overstated and improperly considered. We also urge the agency to move swiftly to complete its final registration review decision and revoke the registration of these compounds due to findings of high risk and demonstrated adverse impacts as reported in the draft Interim Registration Review Decisions.

Information Resources 

Resources Page. The resources page is a user-friendly information tool, displaying easy-to-read boxes highlighting the featured resources under our “Resources” tab, with descriptions. This page allows users to navigate through the plethora of information on our website as the box description can direct users to the resources they are looking for. The descriptions are especially helpful as users will now spend less time searching through our website to find the location of specific information. In addition, the resources page may also encourage users to explore the site further, sparking curiosity in the information we offer. New resources include easy access to the pesticide-free policies/communities across the U.S., as well as a link to the 40 most used lawn chemicals webpage.

Daily News Blog. These information-rich articles are posted every business day on the Beyond Pesticides website. Between regular readers and traffic driven by google news results and social media, the blog has tremendous reach. In fact, thanks to YOU, the total number of reads this year surpassed 355,000, with an average of over 2,500 readers per blog post.

ManageSafe Database. Our hands-on information through ManageSafe, our database of practical solutions to pest issues, is a central clearinghouse of information on eliminating hazardous pesticides in land and building management. Our neighbor-to-neighbor program distributed 400 Pesticide-Free Zone signs (ladybug, bee, and organic landscape) and in 33 states, the District of Columbia, and four Canadian provinces, 1,500 doorknob hangers on safe lawns and mosquito management in 19 states, and the District of Columbia.

Map of U.S. Pesticide Reform Policies. Beyond Pesticides’ map of U.S. Pesticide Reform Policies now includes 18 pesticide-free park policies, 47 with restrictions that protect pollinators, 103 that apply to public spaces, and 27 that extend restrictions to private land, and has been viewed 74,100 times.

Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database (PIDD). Beyond Pesticides updated the website to incorporate more recent scientific studies to the Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database (PIDD). Many of the studies available in PIDD challenge the effectiveness of risk‐assessment‐based regulation which is intended to manage adverse disease outcomes. We developed a relational search engine to enable a search for multiple diseases, some of which can be co-occurring. This search engine is helpful to medical professionals, academic scholars, lawncare/landscape workers, and laypeople alike, as its ease of use allows users to find over 1,174 studies related to pesticide exposure and over 75+ diseases. Additionally, the “and”/“or” function of the search engine allows users to find articles related to pesticide exposure and multiple diseases at once.

Pesticide Gateway. The Gateway is an expanding database of over 300 pesticides containing information about specific pesticide environmental and health effects, regulatory action, and uses. Recent additions to the Gateway include a section on how to find the active ingredients on the label. We occasionally receive information requests regarding specific pesticide products. However, with over 20,000 registered pesticides, it’s nearly impossible to include all products. Thus, the section encourages users to identify the active ingredient in pesticide products. The Gateway provides valuable information about pesticides that anyone can access. 

Safer Disinfectants and Sanitizers. With the increase in the use of sanitizers and disinfectants during Covid-19, we continued to build out our Covid-19 Pandemic webpages, including up-to-date information on safe hand sanitizers and disinfectants, and a Q&A style factsheet on Answering Questions about Toxic Sanitizers and Disinfectants. We produced a factsheet, on the hazards of quaternary ammonium compounds, also known as “quats” or “QACs,” which are in many cleansers and increase the risk of asthma and adverse reproductive effects.

Access the information on disinfectants and sanitizers: Disinfectants and Sanitizers to Protect Against Covid-19.

40 Common Chemicals Used on Lawns and Landscapes. Beyond Pesticides recently launched the 40 Common Lawn Pesticides factsheets for both the health and environmental effect of the most common pesticides used on lawns and landscape, with an accompanying webpage. (This updates our popular 30 Common Lawn Pesticides factsheet.) The factsheets include information from the updated pesticide data usage for EPA (2020), as well as other agencies, institution, or organizational research. An infographic pamphlet was also made to give a brief overview of the findings, including the top 10 most concerning chemicals for ecological and human health. The charts show, based on government sources, that the majority of pesticides in wide use can cause cancer, neurological and respiratory effects, reproductive harm and bird defects, and are toxic to waterways, wildlife, bees and pollinators, and birds and fish.

Access the Full Factsheets and Infographic: 40 Common Lawn and Landscape Chemicals.

Consumer Herbicide Analysis. Beyond Pesticides and Friends of the Earth (FOE) collaborated to provide an easy-to-read spreadsheet detailing health hazards associated with weed killers commonly found at the most popular home and garden retailers, Home Depot and Lowe’s. This analysis highlights the adverse health and environmental effects of widely available toxic pesticides, while encouraging retailers to expand on—and consumers to use—safer, least/nontoxic pesticide products. We analyzed chemical components in over 91 different herbicides. Out of the 91 products, only 28 are classifiable as least toxic/organic. 

Access the full analysis: Herbicide Analysis.

Many Shades of Green Podcast. The environmentally conscious podcast “The Many Shades of Green” interviewed Beyond Pesticides’ science and regulatory manager on the health and environmental impacts of pesticides that the general population may not be aware of. 

Access the full podcast interview: Beyond Pesticides with Guest Akayla Bracey – The Many Shades of Green.

Happy Sprout article: “The pesticides market is now worth $11 billion; that’s a huge problem.” The article provided a wide-ranging interview with the Happy Sprout website about the growth of the pesticide industry, focused on what Beyond Pesticide does, pollinator protection, biodiversity and food security, climate change, public health, safer alternatives to toxic pesticides,  what folks can do.

Access the full article: Toxic Pesticide Use Harms Public Health and the Environment | HappySprout.

Endangered Species Coalition – Environmental Justice Presentation. On March 28, 2021, Beyond Pesticides gave a 40-minute presentation relating the environmental justice movement, environmental racism, and pesticide use. The presentation begins by detailing how widespread pesticide use is, the health and environmental implications of pesticide use, and connects to how these widespread uses disproportionately impact communities of color. The presentation follows-up by demonstrating how the environmental justice movement stemmed by increasing cases of environmental racisms post-Jim Crow. The presentation ends by relating disproportionate risk to pesticides (mainly disinfectants) in communities of color and the impact of the Covid-19 crisis. Additionally, a summation of the presentation was shown as the 2021 National Pesticide Forum.

Lawsuits & Settlements 

Beyond Pesticides sues companies—with legal assistance from Richman Law and Policy—that mislead the public through their labeling and advertising. We have successfully sued, for example, TruGreen and General Mills, for including false statements about safety or production practices. This year Beyond Pesticides sued Sargento for falsely claiming that no antibiotics are used in the production of their cheese products. A settlement resulted in Sargento changing its labeling claim. Beyond Pesticides joined with a coalition of public interest groups to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for its approval of the medically important antibiotic streptomycin for use on citrus trees. This is a transformative moment when we are working to shift society, starting with our communities and local decision makers and individuals, to eliminate toxic fossil fuel-based pesticides and fertilizers.

The Case Against ExxonMobil [Continued]. Our case against Exxon-Mobil for the company’s destructive fossil fuel-related impacts on climate (including their contribution to petroleum-based fertilizer production and use) was put on hold as a result of emergency legislation passed in the District of Columbia that preempts cases where the District’s Attorney General is also litigating on the issue. The AG is suing Exxon-Mobil, and while the case does not have the exact focus of our litigation, it is close enough and could encompass our claim, enabling them to exercise preemption. We are troubled by any law that takes away the citizen suit provision or private right of action because it enhances the ability of to seek justice. We plan to discuss this matter with members of the DC Council, who have historically been committed to the value and importance of action by public interest organizations and individuals to stop misleading and fraudulent corporate behavior. Exxon and tried and failed several times to get the case removed to federal court from the DC Superior Court, where consumer protection provides us with standing to challenge misleading claims.

Lawsuit Against EPA for Registration of Antibiotic of Streptomycin for Use in Citrus The Case Against EPA. Beyond Pesticides joined a lawsuit in March with NRDC, Earthjustice, Center for Biological Diversity, and others against EPA for its registration of streptomycin for use in citrus. The litigation challenges EPA’s final registration decision for the new uses of streptomycin sulfate on citrus crops. We had previously submitted comments to EPA challenging this decision. The litigation brings claims under both the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The lawyers are continuing to evaluate potential claims, but expect to make at least the following arguments. Under ESA, EPA failed to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, despite EPA’s finding that registration of streptomycin as a pesticide may affect threatened or endangered mammals; and EPA failed to determine whether the registration may also affect the critical habitat of these species. This lawsuit is an important action to reverse the previous administration’s decision to ignore the science and allow expanded use of an antibiotic in agriculture.

THE FUTURE

The challenges ahead require that we redouble our efforts. Beyond Pesticides’ collaboration with people and communities in every state is providing the energy and enthusiasm to embrace the changes necessary to stop toxic pesticide use and embrace organic practices and policies. We know it can be done if we join together to protect health and the environment with science, policy, and activism. The solutions are within our reach. We look forward to working with you—with the required sense of urgency—to ensure that change happens.

Best wishes for a healthy new year.