An online community for eradicating bogus bug eradication programs.
LBAM Updates from Stop the Spray SF Newsletter
Seven items in this newsletter. Quick summaries below, with details at the end.
Our thanks to Nan Wishner for preparing this info.
Thanks for your ongoing support,
The STS-SF Team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LBAM UPDATES
1) Albany City Council will consider resolution MONDAY, OCT. 6, 8PM, urging overturning of the state's law prohibiting local governments from regulating pesticides. See below for info about attending the meeting to speak in support or writing a letter of support for this resolution, introduced by the tireless Mayor of Albany, Robert Lieber, who led the East Bay fight against LBAM spray.
2) Two of the bills we got introduced to the state legislature as a result of the LBAM spray have been signed by the Governor: AB 2765 (Huffman) and AB 2763 (Laird). This is a victory, to get two of the five bills we supported, signed into law. However, both of these bills are mixed, with some positive and some not-so-positive aspects. THANKS TO ALL WHO WORKED FOR THE PASSAGE OF THESE BILLS. See below for detailed thoughts about their pros and cons.
3) A Santa Cruz jury has made a ground breaking decision to award an organic farm $1 million for crops contaminated by drift from pesticide sprayed at a neighboring farm. For details, see the article in the SF Chronicle.
The lawyer for the farm that sprayed the pesticides attempts to blame the victim by suggesting that an organic farm should not have moved in where conventional farming was being done. We could easily argue the reverse -- farms that spray pesticides should not have moved in where we do not want pesticides sprayed (on our food!)
4) Rep. Jackie Speier held a hearing on the LBAM spray on Tuesday. Among the highlights (or lowlights!) were USDA representative Osama El-Lissy saying the aerial spray is only POSTPONED until the state Environmental Impact Report on the LBAM program is completed. Drs, Harder, Carey, and Zalom spoke, and Dr. Carey made a strong case that eradication is not possible.
5) A relatively modest increase in the number of LBAM trapped in San Mateo county has resulted in a flurry of news stories this week implying that the scrapping of aerial spraying is responsible for the moths "multiplying like rabbits" (the words of the San Mateo County Ag. Commissioner.) Our own Roy Upton added up the numbers and found that the state can't count, adding more than 150 extra moths to the total (and making even larger errors in total for Santa Cruz county trapping.)
6) The No Spray Theater Company of Marin is performing "Chain of Fools: The Truth Behind the LBAM Fiasco" next weekend at Fairfax Park Stage in Marin Sat. Oct. 11 at 1 PM, and Sun. Oct. 12 at 1 and 3 PM , Donation $7-10, benefiting Stop the Spray Marin.
7) The USDA has killed a pesticide-testing program designed to detect pesticide residues in food, citing cost as the reason. Read the story in the Chicago Tribune. And thanks to Gianna R. for this news tip!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Supporting Albany Anti-Pre-emption Resolution
The Albany City Council will consider, at their meeting this Monday, Resolution 08-62 supporting overturning of state pre-emption of local pesticide regulations.
You can view the resolution by going to the agenda for Monday's meeting and clicking on the link to Resolution 08-62.
You can speak in support of the resolution by attending the meeting at the Albany Community Center, 1249 Marin Ave, starting at 8 PM Monday.
Or you can write to the Council to support the resolution and explain its importance in encouraging statewide support of this change (just as Albany's passage of the first Bay Area resolution against the LBAM program did). A sample letter is below. You can write to the council members and city administrator at the following emails:
Mayor Robert Lieber liebtaub@sbcglobal.net
Vice Mayor Marge Atkinson ma2162@aol.com
Councilmember Joanne Wile jwile@sbcglobal.net
Councilmember Farid Javandel fjavandel@ci.berkeley.ca.us
Councilmember Jewel Okawachi jokawachi@jps.net
City Administrator Beth Pollard bpollard@albanyca.org
SAMPLE EMAIL -- PLEASE SEND BY MID-DAY MONDAY, OCT. 6
Dear Mayor Lieber and Members of the Albany City Council,
Please vote in favor of Resolution 08-62 to urge the state to end pre-emption of local pesticide regulations. Communities should have the right to pass local pesticide laws as they see fit, to protect the health of their residents. The state's pre-emption law conflicts with both federal law and prior State Supreme Court decisions and serves only the interests of pesticide manufacturers.
I appreciate that the Albany City Council took the lead in passing the first Bay Area resolution to oppose the Light Brown Apple Moth aerial spray program and hope you will pass this resolution as well and continue to point the way toward reforming state pesticide law.
Sincerely,
Your name and address
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thoughts on State Bills that the Gov. Signed in to Law This Week
-Nan Wishner
The governor signed AB 2765 (Huffman) and 2763 (Laird) on Monday. We can certainly call it a victory that two of the five pieces of legislation introduced in response to the LBAM debacle made it to the governor's desk and are now law (and CDFA rendered moot by complying another of those proposed bill's, Leno's, which required an EIR before LBAM aerial spraying). So we are 3 for 5, in simple terms. Thanks to everyone who worked hard to get these bills passed.
AB 2763 (Laird) is the greater victory in one significant way: it requires that health assessments of aerial spray plans consider not only impacts on "healthy adults" but also on healthy children, children and adults with compromised health, domestic animals, fish and wildlife, public health and the environment including drinking water. This is a very important change in both state law and the general way in which health and environmental impacts studies are generally done, and we can't underestimate its significance. It is, in my view, one of our biggest achievements in changing how the state does business.
AB 2763 also expands a little bit the range of state agencies involved in assessing an aerial spray plan. In addition to our "friends" DPH, OEHHA, and DPR, the state Water Resources Control Board and other departments must participate in preparing the plan. It also requires that the state consider a "no action" option for each invasive species that is detected in the state. Public hearings and required, and CDFA is *required* to reassess the appropriateness of their planned action in light of the public comment they receive.
On the down side, this bill also only requires disclosure of inerts to the extent permitted by federal law, and all of what it requires is subject to "available funding."
AB 2765 (Huffman) requires less than Laird's bill with regard to public hearings, etc. prior to aerial spray, and its requirement for disclosure of pesticide ingredients was similarly watered down and only requires disclosure of full aerial spray formulas to the extent permitted by federal law, which protects inert ingredients as proprietary business information.
Those who have been at the business longer than I have of trying to pass good state environmental legislation have reminded me that getting a bill through that makes real change often takes three years. So we should feel proud of what we accomplished in only one year, starting late in the legislative cycle to boot.
Our thanks to Nan Wishner for preparing this info.
Thanks for your ongoing support,
The STS-SF Team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LBAM UPDATES
1) Albany City Council will consider resolution MONDAY, OCT. 6, 8PM, urging overturning of the state's law prohibiting local governments from regulating pesticides. See below for info about attending the meeting to speak in support or writing a letter of support for this resolution, introduced by the tireless Mayor of Albany, Robert Lieber, who led the East Bay fight against LBAM spray.
2) Two of the bills we got introduced to the state legislature as a result of the LBAM spray have been signed by the Governor: AB 2765 (Huffman) and AB 2763 (Laird). This is a victory, to get two of the five bills we supported, signed into law. However, both of these bills are mixed, with some positive and some not-so-positive aspects. THANKS TO ALL WHO WORKED FOR THE PASSAGE OF THESE BILLS. See below for detailed thoughts about their pros and cons.
3) A Santa Cruz jury has made a ground breaking decision to award an organic farm $1 million for crops contaminated by drift from pesticide sprayed at a neighboring farm. For details, see the article in the SF Chronicle.
The lawyer for the farm that sprayed the pesticides attempts to blame the victim by suggesting that an organic farm should not have moved in where conventional farming was being done. We could easily argue the reverse -- farms that spray pesticides should not have moved in where we do not want pesticides sprayed (on our food!)
4) Rep. Jackie Speier held a hearing on the LBAM spray on Tuesday. Among the highlights (or lowlights!) were USDA representative Osama El-Lissy saying the aerial spray is only POSTPONED until the state Environmental Impact Report on the LBAM program is completed. Drs, Harder, Carey, and Zalom spoke, and Dr. Carey made a strong case that eradication is not possible.
5) A relatively modest increase in the number of LBAM trapped in San Mateo county has resulted in a flurry of news stories this week implying that the scrapping of aerial spraying is responsible for the moths "multiplying like rabbits" (the words of the San Mateo County Ag. Commissioner.) Our own Roy Upton added up the numbers and found that the state can't count, adding more than 150 extra moths to the total (and making even larger errors in total for Santa Cruz county trapping.)
6) The No Spray Theater Company of Marin is performing "Chain of Fools: The Truth Behind the LBAM Fiasco" next weekend at Fairfax Park Stage in Marin Sat. Oct. 11 at 1 PM, and Sun. Oct. 12 at 1 and 3 PM , Donation $7-10, benefiting Stop the Spray Marin.
7) The USDA has killed a pesticide-testing program designed to detect pesticide residues in food, citing cost as the reason. Read the story in the Chicago Tribune. And thanks to Gianna R. for this news tip!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Supporting Albany Anti-Pre-emption Resolution
The Albany City Council will consider, at their meeting this Monday, Resolution 08-62 supporting overturning of state pre-emption of local pesticide regulations.
You can view the resolution by going to the agenda for Monday's meeting and clicking on the link to Resolution 08-62.
You can speak in support of the resolution by attending the meeting at the Albany Community Center, 1249 Marin Ave, starting at 8 PM Monday.
Or you can write to the Council to support the resolution and explain its importance in encouraging statewide support of this change (just as Albany's passage of the first Bay Area resolution against the LBAM program did). A sample letter is below. You can write to the council members and city administrator at the following emails:
Mayor Robert Lieber liebtaub@sbcglobal.net
Vice Mayor Marge Atkinson ma2162@aol.com
Councilmember Joanne Wile jwile@sbcglobal.net
Councilmember Farid Javandel fjavandel@ci.berkeley.ca.us
Councilmember Jewel Okawachi jokawachi@jps.net
City Administrator Beth Pollard bpollard@albanyca.org
SAMPLE EMAIL -- PLEASE SEND BY MID-DAY MONDAY, OCT. 6
Dear Mayor Lieber and Members of the Albany City Council,
Please vote in favor of Resolution 08-62 to urge the state to end pre-emption of local pesticide regulations. Communities should have the right to pass local pesticide laws as they see fit, to protect the health of their residents. The state's pre-emption law conflicts with both federal law and prior State Supreme Court decisions and serves only the interests of pesticide manufacturers.
I appreciate that the Albany City Council took the lead in passing the first Bay Area resolution to oppose the Light Brown Apple Moth aerial spray program and hope you will pass this resolution as well and continue to point the way toward reforming state pesticide law.
Sincerely,
Your name and address
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thoughts on State Bills that the Gov. Signed in to Law This Week
-Nan Wishner
The governor signed AB 2765 (Huffman) and 2763 (Laird) on Monday. We can certainly call it a victory that two of the five pieces of legislation introduced in response to the LBAM debacle made it to the governor's desk and are now law (and CDFA rendered moot by complying another of those proposed bill's, Leno's, which required an EIR before LBAM aerial spraying). So we are 3 for 5, in simple terms. Thanks to everyone who worked hard to get these bills passed.
AB 2763 (Laird) is the greater victory in one significant way: it requires that health assessments of aerial spray plans consider not only impacts on "healthy adults" but also on healthy children, children and adults with compromised health, domestic animals, fish and wildlife, public health and the environment including drinking water. This is a very important change in both state law and the general way in which health and environmental impacts studies are generally done, and we can't underestimate its significance. It is, in my view, one of our biggest achievements in changing how the state does business.
AB 2763 also expands a little bit the range of state agencies involved in assessing an aerial spray plan. In addition to our "friends" DPH, OEHHA, and DPR, the state Water Resources Control Board and other departments must participate in preparing the plan. It also requires that the state consider a "no action" option for each invasive species that is detected in the state. Public hearings and required, and CDFA is *required* to reassess the appropriateness of their planned action in light of the public comment they receive.
On the down side, this bill also only requires disclosure of inerts to the extent permitted by federal law, and all of what it requires is subject to "available funding."
AB 2765 (Huffman) requires less than Laird's bill with regard to public hearings, etc. prior to aerial spray, and its requirement for disclosure of pesticide ingredients was similarly watered down and only requires disclosure of full aerial spray formulas to the extent permitted by federal law, which protects inert ingredients as proprietary business information.
Those who have been at the business longer than I have of trying to pass good state environmental legislation have reminded me that getting a bill through that makes real change often takes three years. So we should feel proud of what we accomplished in only one year, starting late in the legislative cycle to boot.
Comment
About
Badge
© 2010 Created by kevinkrejci.
Powered by 
.
You need to be a member of Spray Alert to add comments!
Join Spray Alert