April, 21 2009, 03:54pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Joshua Osborne-Klein, Earthjustice, (206) 343-7340 ext. 28
Glen Spain, PCFFA, (541) 521-8655
Aimee Code, NCAP, (541) 344-5044 ext. 27
Federal Government Finds Three More Pesticides Harm Salmon
Prescribes mitigation measures
SEATTLE
Yesterday, the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) released a "biological
opinion" finding that three pesticides - carbaryl, carbofuran, and
methomyl - jeopardize the existence of protected salmon and steelhead.
The biological opinion
prescribes measures necessary to keep these pesticides out of salmon
waters in Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho. It is the second
such plan issued in the last six months under a court settlement with
fishermen and conservationists.
The new mitigation measures must be implemented within one year. They include:
- Prohibiting aerial applications of the three pesticides within 600 to 1,000 feet of salmon waters
- Prohibiting ground applications of the three pesticides within 50 to 600 feet of salmon waters
- Prohibiting applications of the three pesticides when wind speeds are greater than or equal to 10 mph
"Salmon runs all along the west coast are collapsing, and our
rivers becoming a toxic soup of pesticides is surely one of the
causes," said Glen Spain of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's
Associations (PCFFA). "This new NMFS decision will help
keep pesticides out of salmon-bearing streams and is a step toward
protecting these economically valuable salmon runs and the tens of
thousands of jobs they support. It just makes sense for EPA to stop
allowing pesticides to pollute salmon-bearing rivers,
especially when so many other agencies are spending hundreds of
millions of taxpayer dollars to try to save these endangered salmon
runs."
The three pesticides at issue in the biological opinion are known
to contaminate rivers and streams throughout California and the Pacific
Northwest and poison salmon and steelhead.
"The federal government has a duty to protect imperiled salmon
from these deadly pesticides," said Joshua Osborne-Klein, an attorney
for Earthjustice, the environmental law firm that represented the
salmon advocates. "It's high time we reduce or eliminate
the use of deadly pesticides in order to protect salmon, an icon of the
Pacific Northwest's natural heritage."
Many of the mitigation measures required in the new biological
opinion mirror those NMFS mandated in a previous biological opinion for
three organophosphate pesticides. However, in that prior decision, as
well as in a draft of yesterday's decision, NMFS
required 20-foot non-crop vegetative buffers to be left along all
waterways impacting salmon. NMFS deleted that requirement from the
final decision.
"We're excited by the progress that this decision represents,"
said Aimee Code, the Water Quality Coordinator for the Northwest
Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP). "But we're concerned
that NMFS backslid on an essential element needed to
protect salmon. The science indicates that healthy vegetation next to
rivers and streams filters out pollutants."
NMFS has now determined that current uses of all six of the
pesticides it has reviewed so far are jeopardizing the existence of
west coast salmon and steelhead. The Environmental Protection Agency -
the federal agency charged with regulating pesticide
use - had earlier determined that many salmon runs were not at risk
from these six pesticides. NMFS's review found serious flaws with
EPA's analytical methods and conclusions, and determined that EPA
underestimated the risk that the pesticides pose to salmon.
"Today's findings are an example of why it's so important for the fish
and wildlife scientists at NMFS to provide an independent check on
other agencies' findings about endangered species," said Earthjustice's
Osborne-Klein.
But in the final days of the Bush administration, the federal
government significantly weakened the protections provided by the
consultation process between EPA and NMFS that produced today's
decision. "The Bush administration's warped interpretation
of the law removed the voices of scientific experts responsible for
protecting salmon," continued Osborne-Klein. Those last-minute
regulations are currently being reconsidered by the Obama
administration.
Thirty-one more pesticides will undergo review by the National
Marine Fisheries Service over the next three years. The next opinion,
reviewing 12 pesticides, is due on June 30, 2010.
To read the biological opinion go to:
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/carbamate.pdf
Background
Fact Sheet for Carbaryl, Carbofuran, and Methomyl Biological Opinion
On April 20, 2009, the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) issued a "Biological Opinion" concluding that three dangerous
carbamate pesticides commonly used in the Pacific Northwest and
California are jeopardizing the survival of numerous species
of salmon and steelhead. The decision requires EPA to implement the
following measures to protect salmon and steelhead within one year:
- No-application buffer zones (ranging from 200 to 1,000 feet for
carbaryl and carbofuran, and 50 to 600 feet for methomyl) from all
salmon-bearing waters.
- Prohibition on application of all three pesticides when wind speed
exceeds 10 mph, the soil is saturated with water, or a significant rain
event is expected within 48 hours of application.
The Biological Opinion can be downloaded at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/carbamate.pdf
Technical Background
All three of the pesticides assessed in the Biological
Opinion are neurotoxins. Exposure to these poisons either immediately
kills salmon or impairs their feeding, predator avoidance, spawning,
homing, and migration capabilities. Recent research
has found that these pesticides can have "synergistic effects" on
salmon, which means that exposure to mixtures of carbamates and other
chemicals is even more dangerous than exposure to individual
chemicals.
Carbaryl:
- Carbaryl is the second most frequently detected pesticide
contaminating surface waters in the United States. EPA has classified
carbaryl as moderately toxic to most fish and very highly toxic to
aquatic invertebrates that serve as food sources for salmon
and steelhead.
- Approximately 1.4 million pounds of carbaryl are used annually in
the United States for agriculture. It is used to kill pests on a
variety of in the Pacific Northwest and California, including fruit,
nut, vegetable, and grain crops. It is also used in
non-agricultural contexts such as oyster farming and lawn maintenance.
- Carbaryl is toxic to humans as well as wildlife. EPA has listed
carbaryl as a likely carcinogen, and has determined that carbaryl poses
significant health risks to farmworkers who prepare and apply in
pesticide in the field and who harvest treated crops.
- Bayer CropScience is the primary manufacturer of carbaryl. The
most common brand name for pesticides containing carbaryl is Sevin.
Carbofuran:
- Carbofuran is frequently detected in both surface water and ground
water in the United States. EPA classifies carbofuran as highly toxic
to freshwater fish and highly to very highly toxic to marine fish.
- Approximately 1 million pounds of carbofuran are used annually in
the United States, primarily on corn, alfalfa, potatoes, pine
seedlings, bananas (in Hawaii only), and spinach grown for seed.
- In January 2008, EPA indicated that it believed that the
ecological, occupational, and human dietary risks from carbofuran were
so significant that it proposed to prohibit all carbofuran uses.
However, EPA has not completed the proposed cancellations and
NMFS has determined that carbofuran uses will continue indefinitely.
- The primary manufacturer of carbofuran is FMC Corporation. Carbofuran is sold under various trade names including Furadan.
Methomyl:
- Methomyl is considered to be moderately persistent and highly
mobile in the environment. EPA has classified methomyl as moderately
to highly toxic to fish, and highly toxic to very highly toxic to
freshwater invertebrates that serve as food sources for
salmon and steelhead.
- Approximately 2.5 to 3.5 million pounds of methomyl are used
annually in the United States on a wide variety of crops including
apples, barley, blueberries, corn, grapes, oranges, potatoes, tomatoes,
and wheat. It is also used in bait products to control
pests in non-agricultural settings such as restaurants and
supermarkets.
- Methomyl is primarily manufactured by the DuPont Company. It is sold primarily under the trade name Lannate.
Legal Background
In 2002, the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to
Pesticides, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations,
Institute for Fishery Resources, and Washington Toxics Coalition with
legal representation from Earthjustice, obtained a federal
court order declaring that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency had
violated the Endangered Species Act by failing to consult with NMFS on
the impacts that certain pesticides have on west coast salmon and
steelhead. Washington Toxics Coalition v. EPA,
413
F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2005). As a result of that lawsuit, EPA began
consultations, but NMFS never issued biological opinions or identified
the measures needed to protect salmon and steelhead from the
pesticides. In 2007, some of the same salmon advocates
filed a second lawsuit and entered into a settlement agreement with
NMFS that establishes a schedule for issuing the required biological
opinions. The biological opinion released today is the second of
several decisions that will be released over the next
three years that will assess a total of 37 pesticides.
LATEST NEWS
US Reportedly Working to Stop ICC From Issuing Arrest Warrant for Netanyahu
"There is absolutely no reason for Biden to be involved in this," said one analyst. "But once again, Biden steps in to protect Netanyahu from the consequences of the war crimes he commits."
Apr 28, 2024
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is reportedly growing increasingly concerned that the International Criminal Court is preparing to issue arrest warrants for him and other top government officials for committing war crimes in the Gaza Strip.
The Times of Israelreported Sunday that the Israeli government, in partnership with the U.S., is "making a concerted effort to head off" possible arrest warrants from the ICC, which first launched its war crimes investigation in the occupied Palestinian territories in 2021.
Israel does not recognize the ICC's jurisdiction and has refused to cooperate with the probe. The ICC says it has jurisdiction over Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem.
Citing an unnamed Israeli government source, The Times of Israel reported that "a major focus of the ICC allegations will be that Israel 'deliberately starved Palestinians in Gaza.'" Other officials who could face arrest warrants are Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi.
The Times of Israel's reporting came shortly after Israeli journalist Ben Caspit wrote that Netanyahu is "under unusual stress" over the possibility of arrest warrants and is leading a "nonstop push over the telephone" to forestall ICC action.
Like Israel, the U.S. is not a party to the Rome Statute, which established the ICC in 2002. The legal body is tasked with investigating individuals, not governments.
The U.S., Israel's leading arms supplier, has opposed the ICC's Palestine investigation from the start, with Secretary of State Antony Blinken saying in a 2021 statement that the court "has no jurisdiction over this matter" because "Israel is not a party to the ICC."
But the Biden administration vocally supported the ICC's decision to issue an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin over war crimes committed in Ukraine, even though neither Russia nor Ukraine are parties to the Rome Statute.
Seeing commentary that ICC arrest warrants against Israeli officials would create a dangerous precedent because Israel isn’t a party to the Rome Statute.
Guess who else isn’t a party to the Rome Statute?
Russia.
ICC already crossed that bridge with warrant for Putin.
— Brian Finucane (@BCFinucane) April 28, 2024
The Israeli government has been accused of committing numerous war crimes in Gaza since the October 7 Hamas-led attack, including genocide, ethnic cleansing, and using starvation as a weapon of war. Late last year, the human rights group Democracy for the Arab World Now submitted to the ICC the names of dozens of Israeli military commanders who are believed to have been directly involved in violations of international law.
Reports of potentially imminent ICC action have sparked alarm among conservatives in the United States.
U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) wrote on social media Friday that the court should "should stand down on this immediately."
In an
editorial published that same day, The Wall Street Journal suggested the U.S. and United Kingdom could "risk finding Americans and Britons under the gun" next if they don't warn ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan against issuing arrest warrants for Israeli officials. Human rights organizations and legal experts have said Biden and other U.S. officials could be held liable under international law if they continue supporting Israel's war on Gaza.
"Mr. Khan's candidacy was championed by his native Britain and supported by the U.S.," continues the Journal editorial, "so both countries may have influence if they warn Mr. Khan of what will happen if he proceeds."
The Times of Israelnoted Sunday that according to reports in several Israeli media outlets, the U.S. is "part of a last-ditch diplomatic effort to prevent the International Criminal Court from issuing arrest warrants against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials."
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, argued Sunday that "there is absolutely no reason for Biden to be involved in this."
"But once again," Parsi added, "Biden steps in to protect Netanyahu from the consequences of the war crimes he commits, which Biden claims he privately is frustrated about."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Leaked State Department Memo: Israeli Assurances 'Neither Credible Nor Reliable'
"Today's leak should mark a final end to this impunity. President Biden has no choice but to fully enforce the law and halt aid to Israel."
Apr 28, 2024
A newly leaked internal memo shows that officials at four U.S. State Department bureaus don't believe the Israeli government's assurances that it is using American weaponry in Gaza in compliance with international law, rejecting them as "neither credible nor reliable."
The memo, first reported by Reuters on Saturday, is a joint submission from the State Department's bureaus of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor; Population, Refugees, and Migration; Global Criminal Justice; and International Organization Affairs.
The leaked document raises "serious concern over non-compliance" with international law, specifically citing the Israeli military's repeated attacks on civilian infrastructure, refusal to investigate or punish those responsible for atrocities, and killing of "humanitarian workers and journalists at an unprecedented rate," according to Reuters.
The memo also points to Israel's arbitrary rejection of humanitarian aid trucks, which has fueled famine in the Gaza Strip. The bureaus' conclusion matches that of officials at the United States Agency for International Development.
Human rights groups have been documenting Israel's atrocities and systematic obstruction of aid for months, but the Biden administration has continued approving weapons sales for the Netanyahu government despite U.S. laws prohibiting arms transfers to countries violating human rights and blocking American humanitarian assistance.
Sarah Leah Whitson, executive director of Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), said Saturday that "the State Department's leaked confirmation that Israel has restricted the transport and delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance leaves no doubt: U.S. law requires the suspension of military aid to Israel."
"For too long, the Biden administration has breached or ignored U.S. laws that require the suspension of aid to an abusive regime like Israel, fueling Israeli belligerence and rewarding its atrocities," said Whitson. "It's time for real consequences."
"Suspending military aid is the bare minimum the U.S. must do to avoid further complicity in these abuses."
In March, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant penned a letter assuring the Biden administration that the Israeli military's use of American weaponry has been in line with international law. A spokesperson for the U.S. State Department subsequently indicated that the Biden administration has not found Israel "to be in violation of international humanitarian law," drawing outrage from analysts and members of Congress who say it is obvious Israel is committing war crimes. in Gaza.
The U.S. State Department is expected to deliver its final assessment of Israel's assurances to Congress in early May.
The written assurances from Israel were required under a White House policy known as National Security Memorandum 20 (NSM-20), which has the ostensible aim of preventing "arms transfers that risk facilitating or otherwise contributing to violations of human rights or international humanitarian law."
NSM-20 states that "in furtherance of supporting Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2378-1) and applicable international law," the U.S. will "obtain credible and reliable written assurances from a representative of the recipient country as the Secretary of State deems appropriate that, in any area of armed conflict where the recipient country uses such defense articles, consistent with applicable international law, the recipient country will facilitate and not arbitrarily deny, restrict, or otherwise impede, directly or indirectly, the transport or delivery of United States humanitarian assistance and United States Government-supported international efforts to provide humanitarian assistance."
Raed Jarrar, DAWN's advocacy director, said Saturday that "Section 620I has been rendered toothless by State Department inaction and special treatment for Israel."
"Today's leak should mark a final end to this impunity. President Biden has no choice but to fully enforce the law and halt aid to Israel," said Jarrar. "From bombing residential towers to blocking food and medicine, Israel's war on Gaza has been marked by utter disregard for civilian life and international law. Suspending military aid is the bare minimum the U.S. must do to avoid further complicity in these abuses. But it's an essential first step to show that even Israel is not above the law."
Details of the internal State Department memo emerged just days after Congress gave final approval to a foreign aid package that includes $17 billion in unconditional military assistance for the Israeli government.
In a joint statement on Friday, dozens of civil society groups warned that the newly approved military aid risks deepening U.S. complicity in an assault that has killed more than 34,000 people and put millions at risk of starvation.
"Not only does this supplemental aid package provide Israel with billions in lethal arms, it also provides the country with privileges above and beyond anything it has ever received, in particular for the war reserve stockpile and offshore procurement," the groups said. "The passage of the supplemental bill further risks U.S. complicity in grave international crimes committed by Israel."
"We urge the administration and Congress to uphold U.S. law and policy and international law by withholding the transfer of additional lethal military aid to Israel," they added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Disgust Greets White House Correspondents' Dinner as Israel Kills Journalists in Gaza
"To sit and schmooze with the president while he sends billions of dollars in weapons to Israel to kill their colleagues in Gaza is unethical and immoral."
Apr 27, 2024
On Saturday night, U.S. reporters and government officials—including President Joe Biden—will gather at the Washington Hilton Hotel for the annual White House Correspondents' Dinner, a glitzy, humor-filled affair that has faced mounting boycott calls in recent weeks as Palestinian journalists in Gaza are targeted and killed by the Israeli military in appalling numbers.
Earlier this month, dozens of Palestinian journalists urged their American colleagues to spurn the invite-only event "as an act of solidarity with us—your fellow journalists—as well as with the millions of Palestinians currently being starved in Gaza due to the Biden administration's continued political, financial, and military backing of Israel."
One journalist, Mehdi Hasan of Zeteo, has heeded the call.
"I have attended the White House Correspondents' Dinner for the past two years," Hasan, a former MSNBC host, wrote on social media Saturday, hours before the event. "I decided not to attend today's dinner (which, to be clear, is hosted by D.C. journalists not the White House) in solidarity with under-fire Palestinian journalists in Gaza who have called for a boycott."
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, at least 97 media workers—92 of them Palestinian—have been killed in Gaza, Israel, and Lebanon since October 7. The Palestinian Journalist Syndicate puts the number higher at 125.
"Israel has killed over 10% of our colleagues," said Shuruq As'ad, director of the Palestine Journalism Hub and supporter of calls to boycott the White House Correspondents' Dinner, which is hosted by the White House Correspondents' Association.
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), an organization representing more than 600,000 media workers across 146 countries, endorsed the boycott push on Saturday, as did the National Writers Union (NWU).
"More than 100 journalists and media workers have been killed in the past six months of Israel's war on Gaza, backed by the United States government," NWU said in a statement. "As a union of journalists and media workers who strive for truth, we refuse to normalize genocide. Stand with journalists in Gaza and amplify the call for a boycott."
Israel's assault on Gaza, which has been fueled by U.S. weapons and diplomatic support, is the deadliest conflict for journalists in decades. Last year, roughly 75% of the journalists killed globally were killed by Israeli forces.
Al Jazeera's Gaza bureau chief, Wael Dahdouh, has lost five family members to Israeli airstrikes, including his 27-year-old son Hamza, who was also a journalist.
"To dine with him as he allows Palestinians to die of starvation by cutting off funding to critical humanitarian aid is despicable."
Press freedom groups have accused the Biden White House of failing to do enough to stop the Israeli military from targeting members of the media, who continue to risk their lives to show the world the devastation Israel is inflicting in Gaza.
"The Biden administration has been all talk when it comes to journalists killed by the Israel Defense Forces," Seth Stern, director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said earlier this year. "The Biden administration says it cares deeply about journalists' freedom to cover the war but has failed to demand Israel ensure journalists' safety or hold it accountable when it doesn't."
The New York Timesreported that in addition to the jokes, Biden is "expected to issue a more serious warning at a time when journalists around the world are being jailed or detained more frequently for doing their job."
But it remains to be seen whether the president will mention Gaza journalists specifically.
President Biden will address the White House Correspondents Dinner tonight. It’s expected that’ll he’ll mention threats to journalists around the world. Will he mention Israel’s murder of Shireen Abu Aqlah & the scores of Palestinian journalists murdered in Gaza? Probably not. pic.twitter.com/nA6M2t9nK9
— James J. Zogby (@jjz1600) April 27, 2024
Protests are expected outside the dinner's venue, but as NBC Newsreported, "protests inside the event itself are much less common and perhaps unprecedented, given the tight security."
"People involved in organizing the protests said they knew of no plans to try to infiltrate the exclusive invite-only dinner," the outlet added. (Kelly O'Donnell, NBC's senior White House correspondent, is presiding over this year's dinner.)
Sandra Tamari, executive director of the Adalah Justice Project, which helped organize the letter calling for a boycott of Saturday's dinner, said it's grotesque for reporters who claim to be committed to a free press to pal around with members of an administration that is aiding deadly attacks on journalists in Gaza.
"To sit and schmooze with the president while he sends billions of dollars in weapons to Israel to kill their colleagues in Gaza is unethical and immoral," said Sandra Tamari, executive director of Adalah Justice Project, which helped organize the letter calling for a boycott of Saturday's dinner. "To dine with him as he allows Palestinians to die of starvation by cutting off funding to critical humanitarian aid is despicable."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular