May 1, 2007
Organic NZ Magazine - May/June 2007.Written by Soil & Health Spokesperson, Steffan Browning.
Note: This article differs from the one printed in the magazine and includes additional information. Trade names of the reassessment list chemicals can be found at the end of this unabridged article.
The persistent insecticide Endosulphan, has been accepted as a chemical for reassessment by ERMA (Environmental Risk Management Authority).
Following submissions, ERMA has selected four substances to consider for reassessment in 2006-07, and another 16 to consider within five years. Soil & Health, Pesticide Action Network, and Safe Food Campaign identified Endosulphan as the first preference, which was expressed in submissions.
In our joint media release on the ERMA decision, Meriel Watts said, “Usage of endosulfan remains high in New Zealand, in spite of research linking it to adverse health and environmental effects. Apart from breast cancer, this highly toxic insecticide has been linked to hormonal disruption, mimicking oestrogen and producing infertility, as well as foetal, gene, neurological, behavioural and immune system damage at very low doses.
We have one of the highest rates of breast cancer in the world and we must do everything we can to reduce exposure to chemicals that increase the risk of breast cancer. This pesticide has caused many deaths overseas and we want it completely banned here.”
Following submissions, the Environmental Risk Management Authority of New Zealand (ERMA) has selected 4 substances to ‘draw up Grounds for Reassessment’, in 2006-07, and another 16 to consider within 5 years.
While ERMA has more than 10% of its resources tied up with the huge high profile 1080 reassessment (hearings mid May), and remains poorly funded by government for its reassessment program, it is disappointing that 2 of four effectively need no reassessment due to their use already discontinued. The remaining 2 will still keep Soil & Health and friends busy.
* Endosulfan and its formulations; Trade names: Endo, Thiodan, Thionex, Flavylan.
* Azinphos methyl and its formulations, Trade name Colnion 200. An organophosphate that the US is phasing out by 2010, Canada this year. Australia has some new restrictions.
Without more resources it could take ERMA 5 years to reconsider just 20 of the hundreds of hazardous substances.
To speed up reassessments, ERMA has expressed interest in discussing mechanisms to consider category groups of substances, such as organophosphates or pesticides which are aerially sprayed. Soil & Health will push for reassessment of pesticide domestic use and retail sales.
Several assessments for new hazardous substances are also open for comment as we head to press. Included in the website www.ermanz.govt.nz line up are 7 which Soil & Health know are not needed in a truly sustainable New Zealand. One was a timber preservative that could be redundant if New Zealand diversified into more naturally durable hardwood timbers.
The increased, albeit under- resourced, pesticide reassessments can be linked to the well presented submissions of Meriel Watts and Alison White for the petition of the late Kees Bon to the Local Government and Environment Committee.
This petition followed an incident in Waiotira, Northland where the now deceased Laurie Newman and Kees Bon, and Caroline Bon and others developed health issues due to 2,4-D spray drift.
The petition, in the name of Caroline’s father Kees, contained four specific requests:
* That all applicators of agrichemical substances be required to obtain a licence or permit which is renewable biannually, and which can only be gained through compliance with a specifically designed code of ethics that is concerned with the reduction of risks to human and animal health. Any violation of these conditions should be met with severe fines and loss of licence or permit.
* That all applicators of agrichemicals be required to appropriately notify property holders or persons within a given distance of the proposed application. The agrichemicals to be used should also be identified.
* That highly volatile and toxic chemicals, including 2,4,5-T, paraquat, and 2,4-D, be banned in New Zealand.
* That agrichemicals be sold in approved outlets only, stored in a secure area, and sold to only those persons displaying a current licence or permit. Agrichemicals should not be sold on premises selling foodstuffs.
Although 2,4-D is not in the 06-07 reassessment list, Soil & Health will request that it is part of the 07-08 list.
The petitioners, and Dr Meriel Watts and Alison White, Sue Kedgley, and others who have campaigned so vigorously can see from the following extracts from last years select committee report that the cross party group has accepted the need for investment in reassessments. Mr Cullen get your pen out, the petition was from 1999, and that particular spraydrift occurred in 1995, and 2,4-D is still being used.
1999/227 Petition of Kees Bon and 146 others was referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee of the forty-sixth Parliament on 21 February 2002. The Local Government and Environment Committee of the forty-seventh Parliament asked Dr Meriel Watts to act as principal petitioner and sought a submission.
The Local Government and Environment Committee of the forty-eighth Parliament considered the petition and heard evidence on 2 March 2006 and 13 July 2006 from Dr Meriel Watts and Alison White (representing the petitioner), and officials from the Ministry for the Environment and the Environmental Risk Management Authority. Kees Bon died in 2002. Dr Meriel Watts, coordinator of the Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa, subsequently agreed to act as principal petitioner. We appreciate the contribution that they and others who signed the petition have made to pesticide management.
The status of these substances in New Zealand can be changed only if they are reassessed under a process administered by ERMA.
We also heard that the existing registration process inevitably relies on data provided by the manufacturer of the substance itself. We believe that it is important that such information is balanced with independent findings.
We are concerned that any reassessment done to protect the public and the environment is unlikely to be funded by an external applicant and that reassessments are therefore severely limited by ERMA’s funding.
We consider it essential that current international findings be incorporated into the prioritisation and reassessment processes.
We do not believe that four reassessments in a year is enough given the number of pesticides used in New Zealand and their potential health and environmental effects.
We recommend that ERMA be provided with adequate ongoing funding to carry out the work of reassessing hazardous substances.
Conclusion
We believe that there have been improvements in agrichemical management practice in New Zealand in recent years, which address certain issues in this petition.
However, some issues of concern remain, in particular regarding the processes for reassessment of hazardous substances, which we believe are too expensive and time-consuming.
In our opinion, investment in this area now may produce considerable savings
in future health expenditure on illnesses that are caused or aggravated by agrichemicals.
We urge the Government to act on our recommendations.
That final recommendation matches what Soil & Health and other NGOs have been saying for years. The need for independent and current data is another old message that ERMA must action, as well as tilting its precaution in favour of human and environmental health ahead of economic matters.
Short term economic matters clearly drove the Hydrogen Cyanimide (HiCane and others) reassessment decision last year. Organic management alternatives were ignored and graphic evidence of spray drift damage on neighbouring property received little attention from ERMA.
It could be that the ERMA Authority struggles with independence itself, or is poorly balanced in its make-up, but Soil & Health for now is continuing to act in good faith and participating in the legal process in the hope that ERMA will improve its assessments.
ERMA proposes to draw up Grounds for Reassessment for the following substances during financial year 2006/7:
* Endosulfan and its formulations; Trade names: Endo, Thiodan, Thionex, Flavylan.
* Azinphos methyl and its formulations, Trade name Colnion 200. An organophosphate that the US is phasing out by 2010, Canada this year. Australia has some new restrictions.
* Methyl-parathion and its formulations; No longer used in NZ, so almost definitely will be removed from any register.
* Pentachlorophenol and its salts. Banned since 1989, so again listing must be part of process for full removal.
Grounds for the following 16 substances will be developed, as resources permit, over the next 5 years. (listed alphabetically, not in order of priority):
* 2,4-D, its salts and esters, and formulations containing these substances
* Acephate and its formulations (incl. methamidophos); Trade names Orthene and Lancer, plus home garden formulations eg McGregors Rose & Shrub Spray. Methamidophos An organophosphate that EU banned in 2003, US banned for indoor residential use plus various other restrictions. Trade names: Tamaron, Monitor, Metafort 60SL and Methafos 600.
* Anti-fouling paints
* Benomyl and carbendazim and their formulations; Fungicide, EU banned 2002, US 2002, Australia 2003.
* Carbaryl and its formulations
* Chlorothalonil and its formulations; Formulations containing chlorothalonil have been registered for agricultural use in New Zealand since 1980. There are currently 25 products containing chlorothalonil that are registered for agricultural use in New Zealand. These are Armourcrop-Fungicide (Mildew), Balear 500SC, Balear 720SC, Barrachlor 720, Barrack 720, Barrier, Bayer Chlorothalonil, Blackspot & Fungus Spray, Blizzard, Bravo, Bravo 720SC, Bravo Weatherstik, Cavalry Fungicide, Chlorotek, Cobra, Crotop 720SC, Dacotec 720SC, Elect 750SC, Fungus & Mildew Spray, Greenguard, Guardall, Harrier, Islandchloronil, Max Cl and Taratek 5F.
* Chlorpyrifos and its formulations; Trade names: Lorsban, Barmac Killmaster, Divap 1000, Dursban, Garden King Peskil,Xterminate 10, Magonex, Curaten, Gusanex, Spectrum, Jolyn CHLOR –P, Pyrifos G, Raid Cockroach Ultra Baits, Pyrinex, Suscon Green, Toppel, Pychlorex 48EC
* Diazinon and its formulations; Trade names: Jolyn Digrub, Dew 500, Yates Soil Insect Killer, Lawnguard Prills, General Purpose Insect Spray, Direct 20P, Diazamex, Averte EC, Diazol, Gesapan, and in most flea collars
* Dichlorvos and its formulations; Trade names: Insectigas, ArmourCrop, Nuvos, Divap 1000, BV2 Surface Insecticide
* Dimethoate and its formulations; an organophosphate, Trade names: Perfecthion S, Garden King ROGOR 1000, Dimezyl
* Fenitrothion and its formulations; Trade names, Caterkil 1000, Borer Fluid FN
* Methamidophos (60%) and its formulations; Trade names, Tamaron, Metafort 60SC, Methafos 600, Monitor
* Methyl bromide;
* Methyl-arsenic acid and its formulations;
* Paraquat and its formulations; Herbicide, Trade names: Preeglone, gramoxone, Boa 250 herbicide, PQ20, Parable, Horizon, Flash Herbicide.
* Trichlorfon and its formulations.
An application for Grounds for Reassessment does not necessarily mean that an application for reassessment will be prepared, but that the substance and the risks and benefits arising from its use will be examined in more detail.
Please make a donation to the Soil & Health Association to support us in our efforts to create an Organic New Zealand.
