January, 28 2010, 12:19pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jeff Miller, Center for Biological Diversity, (510) 499-9185
Lawsuit Initiated to Protect Hundreds of Endangered Species From Pesticide Impacts
SAN FRANCISCO
The Center for Biological Diversity today filed notice of intent to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for failing to adequately evaluate and regulate nearly 400
pesticides harmful to hundreds of endangered species throughout the
nation, which also threaten human health. The EPA has violated the
Endangered Species Act by failing to consult with wildlife regulatory
agencies about the impacts of pesticides on hundreds of protected
species that are threatened by pesticide use. The agency has also
violated the Migratory Bird Treaty Act by registering pesticides that
are known to kill and harm migratory birds.
"It's
time for the Environmental Protection Agency to finally reform
pesticide use to protect both wildlife and people," said Jeff Miller, a
conservation advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Many
endangered species most affected by toxic pesticides are already
struggling to cope with habitat loss and rapid climate changes. For too
long this agency's oversight has been abysmal, allowing the pesticide
industry to unleash a virtual plague of toxic chemicals into our
environment."
More than a billion
pounds of pesticides are used each year in the United States, and the
Environmental Protection Agency has registered more than 18,000
different pesticides for use. Extensive scientific studies have shown
that pesticide contamination is widespread and pervasive in
groundwater, drinking water, and aquatic habitat for fish and wildlife
throughout the country. Through pesticide drift and runoff, pesticides
often travel far from the areas where they're applied and into
sensitive wildlife habitats. Some contaminated waterways are regularly
subjected to toxic pulses of combinations of pesticides deadly to fish.
Pesticides have played a major role in the collapse of many native fish
populations and are a leading cause of the loss of native amphibians.
Today's notice letter references 887 endangered and threatened species
that may be hurt by pesticides Some examples include the Florida
panther, coho salmon, California condor, Everglade snail kite, northern
Aplomado falcon, mountain yellow-legged frog, California tiger
salamander, arroyo toad, Indiana bat, and green sturgeon. Thousands of
non-target animals such as mountain lions, bobcats, hawks, and owls are
killed or harmed each year by poisoned baits approved by the EPA, as
are endangered species such as the San Joaquin kit fox, Utah prairie
dog, giant kangaroo rat, and black-footed ferret. Application of
pesticides such as carbofuran to crops can result in as many as 17 bird
kills for every five acres treated.
"Millions
of pounds of toxic and poisonous chemicals, including known carcinogens
and endocrine disruptors, find their way into our waterways each year,
causing significant and unnecessary threats to endangered wildlife and
to human health," said Miller. "The Environmental Protection Agency
needs to analyze the effects of pesticides across the board on hundreds
of imperiled species."
Numerous
pesticides act as endocrine disruptors, chemicals that alter the
structure or function of the body's endocrine system, which uses
hormones to regulate growth, metabolism, and tissue function. Endocrine
disruptors interfere with natural hormone functions, damaging
reproductive function and offspring, and cause developmental,
neurological, and immune problems in wildlife and humans. Pesticides
have caused sexual deformities such as intersex fish (with male and
female reproductive parts) that cannot reproduce, and the herbicide atrazine chemically castrates male frogs at extremely low concentrations.
In 2004 the Center published Silent Spring Revisited: Pesticide Use and Endangered Species, detailing the Environmental Protection Agency's dismal record in protecting endangered species from pesticides. The Center's Pesticides Reduction Campaign
has so far forced the Environmental Protection Agency to begin
evaluating the harmful effects of scores of pesticides on a dozen
endangered species in California.
Regulatory Background
The
EPA is required by the Endangered Species Act to consult with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service over
registration, re-registration, and approved uses of pesticides that may
endanger listed species or adversely affect their designated critical
habitat. Formal consultations are designed to ensure that the agency
avoids authorizing pesticide uses that jeopardize endangered species.
For decades the agency has consistently failed to evaluate or
adequately regulate pesticides it registers that are harmful to the
species.
A series of lawsuits by the Center and
other conservation groups have forced consultations with the Fish and
Wildlife Service on the impacts of scores of pesticides on some
endangered species, primarily in California, and interim restrictions
on use of these pesticides in and adjacent to endangered species
habitats. In 2006 the EPA agreed to interim restrictions on applying 66
pesticides throughout California and began analyzing their effects on
the California red-legged frog. In 2010 the agency proposed a
settlement agreement to formally evaluate the harmful effects of 75
pesticides that may affect 11 imperiled San Francisco Bay Area species.
At
the completion of consultation, the federal wildlife agency issues a
biological opinion that determines if the agency action is likely to
jeopardize listed species. The opinion may specify reasonable and
prudent alternatives that will avoid jeopardy and may also suggest
modifications to avoid adverse effects. The EPA has failed to implement
previous biological opinions on pesticides to meet "no jeopardy"
obligations.
The EPA has violated Section 2 of the
Endangered Species Act, which requires that federal agencies "seek to
conserve endangered species and threatened species," and Section 7 of
the Act, which requires it to engage in consultation with the federal
wildlife agencies Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine
Fisheries Service to ensure that pesticide registrations are not likely
to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened
species or result in the adverse modification of designated critical
habitat. The agency has failed to enter into consultation regarding the
vast majority of pesticides and to re-consult on species and pesticides
previously addressed in consultations for which there is new
information. It has also violated Section 9 of the Act through
registration of pesticide uses that have resulted in the illegal "take"
of listed species. The agency is violating the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act by registering pesticide uses that cause take of migratory birds.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252LATEST NEWS
Privacy Defenders Decry 'Spy Draft' in Section 702 Renewal Advanced by Senate
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," explained one critic.
Apr 18, 2024
Civil liberties defenders on Thursday decried the U.S. Senate's advancement of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, which critics say lawmakers are trying to ram through without protection against warrantless surveillance and with a provision that would effectively make every American a spy whether they like it or not.
Senators voted 67-32 in favor of a cloture motion to begin voting on RISAA, a bill to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which expires on Friday. FISA—a highly controversial law that has been abused hundreds of thousands of times—allows warrantless surveillance of non-U.S. citizens but also often sweeps up Americans' communication data in the process.
In a 273-147 vote last week, House lawmakers passed RISAA, including an amendment critics say dramatically expands the government's unchecked surveillance authority by compelling a wide range of individuals and organizations—including businesses and the media—to cooperate in government spying operations.
This so-called "Make Everyone a Spy" clause would allow the attorney general or director of national intelligence to force electronic communication service providers to "immediately provide... all information, facilities, or assistance" the government deems necessary.
"This bill would basically allow the government to institute a spy draft," Seth Stern, director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, warned Thursday. "It will lead to significant distrust between journalists and sources, not to mention everyone else."
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," he added. "Regardless of whether the end target of the surveillance is a foreigner, it's indisputable that the people the government can enlist to conduct the surveillance are Americans. And what's more, these civilians ordered to spy would be gagged and sworn to secrecy under the law."
In addition to the "Make Everyone a Spy" provision, civil libertarians have sounded the alarm over the House lawmakers' rejection of an amendment that would have added a warrant requirement to the legislation.
Critics accuse Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and colleagues including Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) of trying to rush a vote on RISAA while disingenuously claiming Section 702's powers will expire with the law on Friday. That's a misleading claim, as a national security court earlier this month approved the government's request to continue a disputed surveillance program even if Section 702 lapses.
"There is simply no defense of Majority Leader Schumer and Sen. Warner's duplicity," Sean Vitka, policy director at the progressive advocacy group Demand Progress, said in a statement. "House Intelligence Committee leaders poisoned this bill with one of the most repugnant surveillance expansions in history, and apparently the administration was too busy attacking commonsense privacy protections to notice. They know it, we know it, and now the American people know it."
"There can be no mistake: Sens. Schumer and Warner just helped hand the next president an unspeakably dangerous weapon that will be used against their own constituents," Vitka added. "And there is only one vote left to stop it."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—who
said earlier this week that the bill would dragoon the American people into becoming "an agent for Big Brother"—on Thursday argued that "this issue demands a debate about meaningful reforms, not a rushed vote to rubber-stamp more warrantless government surveillance powers."
In an attempt to tackle the warrantless surveillance issue, Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) on Thursday proposed a RISAA amendment that would require the government to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court before accessing Americans' private communications.
However, the amendment contains exceptions to the warrant requirement in the event of unspecified emergencies and cyberattacks.
"If the government wants to spy on the private communications of Americans, they should be required to get approval from a judge—just as our Founders intended," Durbin said in a statement. "Congress has a responsibility to the American people to get this right."
The Biden administration and U.S. intelligence agencies vehemently oppose the Durbin-Cramer amendment. The White House called the measure "a reckless policy choice contrary to the key lessons of 9/11 and not grounded in any constitutional requirement or statute."
"The amendment outright bars the government from gaining access to lawfully collected information using terms associated with U.S. persons," the administration added. "Exceptions to that prohibition are narrow and unworkable. They are insufficient to protect our national security."
On Wednesday, the House also passed the Fourth Amendment Is Not for Sale Act, which would prohibit the government from buying Americans' information from data brokers if it would otherwise need a warrant to obtain the data, which includes location and internet records. The Senate will now take up FANFSA.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Opposite of Leadership': US Vetoes Palestine's UN Membership
Palestine's permanent observer at the United Nations said the resolution's failure "will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination."
Apr 18, 2024
U.S. President Joe Biden's administration on Thursday used the country's veto power at the United Nations Security Council to block Palestine's bid to become a full member of the U.N.
While 12 nations voted in favor of Palestinian membership and two abstained, the United States is one of five countries—along with China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom—who have veto authority at the Security Council.
Since Israel launched what the International Court of Justice has said is a "plausibly" genocidal assault of the Gaza Strip in response to a Hamas-led October attack, the Biden administration has blocked three cease-fire resolutions at the Security Council. Under mounting global pressure, the U.S. finally abstained last month, allowing a cease-fire measure to pass.
In the lead-up to Thursday's vote, the Biden administration was pressuring other countries to oppose the Palestinian Authority's renewed membership effort so it could possibly avoid a veto, according to leaked cables obtained by The Intercept.
"Take a moment to ponder how isolated Biden has made the U.S.," said Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, after the veto. "Biden lobbied Japan, South Korea, and Ecuador HARD to oppose the Palestine resolution so that the U.S. wouldn't have to veto. They refused. So Biden cast his fourth veto in seven months (!!) This is the opposite of leadership."
In addition to the nations Parsi highlighted, Algeria, China, France, Guyana, Malta, Mozambique, Russia, Sierra Leone, and Slovenia voted for giving Palestine full U.N. membership while Switzerland and the United Kingdom abstained.
After the vote, U.N. Newsreported on remarks from Riyad Mansour, a U.N. permanent observer for the state of Palestine:
"We came to the Security Council today as an important historic moment, regionally and internationally, so that we could salvage what can be saved. We place you before a historic responsibility to establish the foundations of a just and comprehensive peace in our region."
Council members were given the opportunity "to revive the hope that has been lost among our people" and to translate their commitment towards a two-state solution into firm action "that cannot be maneuvered or retracted," and the majority of council members "have risen to the level of this historic moment, and they have stood on the side of justice and freedom and hope, in line with the ethical and humanitarian and legal principles that must govern our world and in line with simple logic."
"The fact that this resolution did not pass will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination," Mansour added. "We will not stop in our effort. The state of Palestine is inevitable. It is real. Perhaps they see it as far away, but we see it as near, and we are the faithful."
Parsi said that "a Western-friendly senior Global South diplomat" told him of Biden's veto: "Whatever agonizing claim the U.S. had to lead a self-appointed free world has died a very loud public death on the Security Council horseshoe tonight. YOU CAN'T LEAD IF YOU CAN'T LISTEN."
Biden, a Democrat seeking reelection in November, has faced fierce criticism in the United States and around the world for U.S. complicity in Israel's war on Gaza—which Hamas, not the Palestinian Authority, has controlled for nearly two decades. In under seven months, Israeli forces have killed 33,970 Palestinians, injured another 76,770, displaced most of the besieged enclave's 2.3 million population, devastated civilian infrastructure, and severely limited the flow of lifesaving humanitarian assistance.
Israel—which already got $3.8 billion in annual U.S. military aid before October 7—continues to receive weapons support from the Biden administration, even as a growing chorus of critics, including some Democrats in Congress, argues that the arms transfers violate U.S. and international law.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Shameful': Columbia Greenlights Police Crackdown on Anti-War Encampment
Even after dozens of students were arrested, hundreds "rushed to take the place of their classmates" and continued the protest.
Apr 18, 2024
The arrests of dozens of Columbia University and Barnard College students on Thursday "galvanized" other supporters of Palestinian rights on the campuses, as hundreds of students occupied the school's western lawn after New York City police filled at least two buses with protesters who had been detained for setting up an encampment.
"Disclose, divest, we will not stop, we will not rest," chanted hundreds of students as they marched around the area where organizers had set up a tent encampment early Wednesday morning.
Columbia President Minouche Shafik informed the campus community on Thursday that she had authorized the police to clear the encampment.
As it has been in the past, the school has become a center of anti-war protests—and crackdowns by school officials and the police—since Israel began its bombardment of Gaza in October.
Pro-Palestinian students and alumni have demanded that Columbia divest from companies that profit from Israel's apartheid policies in the occupied Palestinian territories and cancel its dual degree program with Tel Aviv University.
In response to pro-Palestinian demonstrations, Columbia in November suspended the campus chapters of Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine—an action that pushed the New York Civil Liberties Union and Palestine Legal to file a lawsuit on behalf of the students last month.
On Thursday, police and Columbia employees took down about 50 tents that had been up for more than a day and disposed of them in trash cans and alleyways—but The New York Times reported later that "demonstrators repitched a couple of tents, and ... recovered the main signage from the encampment as well," while hundreds of students were "still gathered and chanting on the south side of the grass."
The arrests came a day after Shafik testified before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce about antisemitism on campus.
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), whose daughter, Isra Hirsi, was among the Barnard students who were suspended on Thursday for participating in the encampment protest, questioned Shafik about whether antisemitic protests have actually taken place at Columbia, prompting the president to say there have not.
"There has been a rise in targeting and harassment against anti-war protesters, because it's been pro-war and anti-war protesters is what it seems, like, correct?" asked Omar.
"Correct," replied Shafik.
On Thursday, Omar posted on social media two images of protesters at Columbia: one from the encampment this week, and one from 1968, when students protested the U.S. war in Vietnam.
New York City Council member Tiffany Cabán was among those who condemned the university's crackdown on the protests on Thursday.
"Suspending and arresting Columbia/Barnard student activists and disbanding student organizations—including Jewish students and organizations—doesn't combat antisemitism or increase safety," said Cabán. "All it does is punish and intimidate those who believe in human rights for Palestinians. Shameful."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular