"It doesn't know when to stop killing"
Hearing in Wadena held on pesticide exposure
by Karin L. Nauber
 |
| "If this had been a physical attack, someone would have went to jail. Nothing was done for this. Is this inside you?" asked Candy Anderson from Browerville at the legislative hearing held on October 18 in Wadena. |
Editor's Note: The hearing held in Wadena on October 18 had approximately five hours of testimony that was heard from concerned citizens and state officials. I was only able to attend three hours of the hearing.
Several state representatives along with a representative from the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, a representative from Clean Water Action, a staff scientist from California who helped develop drift catchers, several local people who presented testimony about pesticides and approximately 150 concerned citizens attended a pesticide hearing held in Wadena on October 18 to talk about the dangers of pesticide use and drift.
State Representative Ken Tschumper from Houston County chaired the meeting. He has also written a bill for an act which would expand the access to pesticide application information. The house file number is 2459 and would call for spraying records to be filed monthly with the Minnesota Department of Agriculture commissioner. It would also include more in the records kept by applicants and that neighbors must be alerted when spraying will be done.
Also attending the hearing were representatives Dean Simpson from the Perham/New York Mills area; Karen Clark from Minneapolis; Denny McNamara from Hastings and Frank Moe from Bemidji. State Representative Mary Ellen Otremba was also in the audience.
MDA Assistant Director for the Regulatory Response Program Paul Liemandt was the first speaker. He said that he and the 37 employees he personally manages all take pesticide regulation very seriously.
"After all, we eat the same food, drink the same water and breathe the same air as everyone else," he said.
Pesticides are the disinfectants, sanitizers, herbicides, repellents, fungicides and insecticides used in homes, businesses, schools, hospitals, landscapes, forests and agriculture, said Liemandt.
His office is responsible for responding to emergencies where exposure has occurred.
He said that between 2000 and 2004 there were 423 complaints filed. Of that number, 94 were where human or animal exposure was alleged. Of that 94, he said 59 enforcement actions were taken with 24 of those involving substantial monetary fines.
He has field inspectors throughout Minnesota who can respond quickly to an exposure to do an investigation and offer victims of exposure first aid advice.
His office has the burden, along with the person who claims exposure, to prove it occurred.
Liemandt said that compared to other states Minnesota has ranked in the top one or two in enforcement.
Clark said, "We are here today because of a problem we have heard about. Have you heard about gaps in the system?"
Liemandt said that every year they are asked about deficiencies in the law. He said that four or five years ago they helped write legislation that would make it illegal to tamper with anhydrous ammonia. He did not have any examples of how to change the law at this time.
Tschumper asked how dangerous pesticide drift was.
Liemandt said it would depend on the product, the dosage and the exposure level.
The first group of citizens who gave testimony at the hearing were: Julie Jansen from Clean Water Action, Candy Anderson from Browerville and Becky Sheets from Staples.
Jansen said that there had been 9282 people tested and all had pesticides found in them with an average of 13 found in each person tested.
"We need better information to protect our children," she said.
Tschumper asked if Jansen was familiar with the bill he had written and if this bill would help?
"Citizens have no way of knowing right now. They have the right to know so they know what symptoms to look for, which cancers to watch for. Doctors don't know how to treat people who have been exposed. Records of spraying would give them that information," said Jansen.
Anderson spoke next. She said they had noticed about three years ago that their lambs and goat kids were being born suffering from neurological problems. For example, they couldn't suckle or stand.
Their ewes began dying and they were trying everything to save their animals.
She said that pesticides were being sprayed directly across from them on a field.
Anderson said that they did their best to avoid exposure. For example, they would try to bale their hay between sprayings.
When there was obvious drift, some of the animals died right away.
"How many times did you develop the flu in the summer when you were young?" asked Anderson.
She said they had to prevent pesticide trespass.
"We have the right to know so we can protect ourselves and our animals," she said.
Because many of the pesticides are estrogen based, she said her animals have hormonal problems.
After one such pesticide drift incident, Anderson said her eyes swelled shut and a month later she developed shingles because of her compromised immune system. Her corneas were burned and she has many problems on her left side.
"Sometimes I still can't drive. I still don't know for sure what I was sprayed with," she said.
"Pesticides live up to their claim. They say they kill and they do. I can't ask you to ban them. But I am asking you to protect me, protect the children. Allow us to know," she said.
At this point, Anderson showed a picture of her eyes when she had been exposed.
"If this had been a physical attack, someone would have went to jail. There was nothing done for this. Is this inside you?" she asked.
Anderson said she did contact MDA. She got several letters from them and then the case was closed. Later she said it was reopened. She has not received a final word on it yet. The incident being investigated happened in July 2006.
Anderson said she hesitated to call MDA because "we're taught that we're doing something wrong if our animals get sick or die. With animals of this size (sheep and goats) how often do you spend $500 on a vet bill? I am a farmer and I didn't want to make problems."
McNamara said it was important that people call MDA every time exposure happens. He encouraged her to continue to reach out to her neighbors who were spraying to have them give notice when they were spraying.
Sheets gave her testimony next.
Sheets has experienced many physical health problems as a result of her exposure.
She worked for a research facility and when she questioned safety, she was told they were safe.
Now she is chemically sensitive, has had tremors on her right side for about a year and a half, suffers from chemically induced asthma, is light and odor sensitive and suffers from depression.
"My doctor told me it was in my head because pesticides don't hurt people," she said.
She also developed nosebleeds for about a six week period in 2002 and went through menopause at age 39.
Sheets isn't alone. Her grandchildren are also suffering from the results of pesticide exposure.
"What are we doing? Pesticides don't know when to stop killing!" she exclaimed.
She said their pigs started aborting their fetuses and now about two survive instead of the typical nine. They are also finding tumors in their chickens.
"We can't afford to leave here and can't afford to stay," she said near tears.
When she began to meet other people who were suffering like herself, she felt better because she had thought she was alone in this.
"Drift is happening, little kids are exposed. This is not about me, I'm pretty sure of my fate. This is about my grandchildren and yours and my neighbors. It is about a healthy future with clean water and air," said Sheets.
Sheets said people had the right to know what, when and where spraying was taking place, that there be enforcement of drift laws, that there be criminal and financial penalties on those who break those laws and that buffer zones be established.
"It may take weeks before pesticide effects are seen. Notification is not the answer when someone is poisoning us," she said.
William Spencer from rural Wadena testified next. He had been sprayed by pesticides in June of 2007.
Immediately after the exposure his tongue and throat began to swell. His daughter who was with him experienced the same thing.
He made a complaint to MDA who came out and investigated.
He said he lost three days of work from the incident and has had friends who have lost three months of work.
These were instances of pesticide drift which Liemandt says is illegal in Minnesota.
"Movement off the targeted site is illegal and in general is not permitted," said Liemandt.
The label on the pesticide being used is the law. If the label is silent about wind conditions or things like that it can be applied at the applicator's discretion.
The pesticide labels are regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Clark asked if Liemandt looked at accumulative damage.
Liemandt said not typically.
Sue Meyer from Browerville was the next person to give testimony.
Meyer has 11 children, seven of whom still live at home.
She said that she called the MDA before the trees near her home were ever planted telling them that those companies use too much pesticide.
She was told it was ag land and that they could spray whatever and whenever they wanted.
After the spraying began, she said she could smell the pesticides, her garden began to die and she and her children began to get sick.
When she called about the use of chemicals, she was given three conflicting reports all on the same day.
She said she felt like a lone wolf howling alone in her cries to stop the drift that was making her family ill.
"There is too much money behind this, I was told by an MDA representative. He also told me there would never be detection from this lab about International Paper (who owns the tree farm near her property)," she said.
She has called in seven times.
Since the spraying began she said she no longer hears frogs, her pet rabbits won't breed, their horses are ill, the bird population in their area is all but gone and there have been changes in the health of her family.
She also suffered from two miscarriages, one which occurred after the sixth day of exposure.
"Everything progresses. Day 6 we are most ill," she said.
This began happening a year after the trees were planted, she said.
"Pesticides kill living organisms. Help us regain our right to know," she said.
She worked with Karl Tupper and a drift catcher was installed in their area.
The drift catcher is about 300 yards from the application area and catches a lot of pesticide drift, she said.
Meyer said she has talked to the applicators and has not been able to get a hold of anyone at International Paper.
McNamara said he would try to get a name for her.
Tschumper asked Liemandt how many open cases there were in his office.
Liemandt said he didn't know, but that they had about 100 cases reported annually.
Karl Tupper was the last testimony that I heard that day, but there were several others who also testified to the deadly effects of a chemical that is doing what it was designed to do, kill.
About a year and a half ago, Tupper had been contacted by the people in the area and Tupper created the drift catcher.
He said between Browerville and Frazee where another catcher is installed, they have collected about 186 air samples.
About two-thirds of the tests contained a chemical fungicide which is often used on potatoes. He said Bravo is one of the names of the chemicals.
He said in their tests in California, animals were sickened at every dose of the chemical when they did inhalation studies.
"These people are not crazy. They have been exposed and continue to be exposed. Don't just dismiss their concerns," said Tupper.
He said they should put public notice first and not to rely on the EPA to protect citizens.
He said that California has right to know laws and they have made it work.
In a press release after the hearing, Tschumper said, "The testimony from citizens affected by pesticide drift caused by these aerial methods of application was troubling. This is obviously a bigger problem than we originally anticipated."
"The people in the Wadena area had strong documentation that their health has been adversely affected by these methods of pesticide application. It's quite clear that we need to consider the issue of whether or not aerial spraying techniques should be allowed to continue in the state of Minnesota," he said.
He is planning further legislative work on these issues in the near future.