Earthblog

In conjunction with our posting of Karen Hare’s “Toxic Trespass” video. Matter Daily reached out to Davey Tree and the Colorado Department of Agriculture. Unfortunately, Davey Tree did not return our email or multiple phone calls, but the Colorado Department of Agriculture was much more forthcoming.

John Scott, the Program Manager for the Pesticide program, could not comment specifically about Karen’s case since it is still open. He did, however, refer to the case as “in it’s final stages”. Whatever the results, Karen’s questions about this specific applicator and their use, or alleged misuse, of pesticides will soon be answered.

In her video, Karen is clearly concerned that any consequences will be insignificant.

John Scott says the Department of Agriculture’s enforcement amounts to “more than a slap on the wrist.” Fines can range from $1000 per incident of misuse up to possible revocation of the applicator’s license.

Still, the department isn’t in the business of shutting down companies just to watching new ones pop up. Instead John’s job is to “make sure the pesticides are applied correctly.”  It’s more efficient to have a working relationship with a company while enforcing proper procedures than an aggressively punitive one. Of course people affected by a company’s violations often long to see severe punishment handed down.

The Department of Agriculture and the Pesticide Applicator Programs are governed by clear statues. The first sentence of the program’s mission reads, “The goals of the Pesticide Applicator Program are to ensure that private and commercial pesticide applicators have the requisite knowledge to handle and apply pesticides, and to ensure that pesticides are applied in a manner which reduces unnecessary associated hazards.” Citizens, especially those of us are chemically sensitive, need to know the scope of the program’s authority. If this protection isn’t enough the legislative side becomes the next step.

Turning back to Karen Hare’s video, John Scott addresses her claims about getting test results from the Department of Agriculture. He says any complainant can write a request for samples taken on their property. All other aspects of the investigation are kept only to the accused until the case is resolved.

As far as the number of staff investigating and enforcing pesticide application at the DOA, John says they have 11 investigators who will be on the job in 24-hours taking statements once a complaint is made. Most investigations can run 30-60 days before before one of two enforcement managers processes the case. If there is a bottleneck it might be where these two staff members are sorting through a backlog of  35-50 complaints per year. John says, a very complex case can take 12-18 months. One can infer from this that Karen Hare’s case stretching past it’s first year must have some complexities to it.

Moving from this specific case to the broader questions at hand John Scott says, “I’ve watched the industry shift several elements.” He talks about three changes. The public is better informed, the chemistry is better, and the applicator industry sees itself more professionally.

John says, “The mindset of the public used to be if people didn’t smell something you weren’t doing your job. It’s been a 180∘shift.” He says, the public is more educated, more informed, and more concerned.

In addition, to us doing our homework, John says the EPA’s registration of chemicals has come a long way. The chemistry has improved, the “half-life is very very small — days not years.” John has also noticed a “huge push for the green market,” for less persistent chemicals with lower toxicity.

Where it would be nice to have Davey Tree’s perspective is John Scott’s last observation, John says, the industry doesn’t want to be seen as “spray jockeys,” but as professionals. The new training and licensure standards and the on-going education have greatly improved. John notes it makes financial, and environmental sense for commercial applicators to use “as little as possible and not spray haphazardly.”

Obviously, there’s still a need for regulation which is why John Scott has his job. What tools lawmakers give him and what work they ask him to do is a big part of the issue.

In the subtitle to the first part of the series I asked a question about our ability to learn. The answer is not clear cut. Karen’s video stirs me up. I understand chemical sensitivity brings it’s own challenges to the individuals affected, but the larger issue still seems to be the questions raised by books like Silent Spring and Living Downstream. What are we putting into our environment and what does it do? How does it add up?

With these questions, reading the MSDS sheet for a chemical like Bifenthrin, the chemical Karen Hare’s tests found in her yard, and coming across phrasing like “Highly toxic to fish and aquatic organisms”, and “symptoms from overexposure include bleeding from the nose, tremors, and convulsions,” leaves me not quite comfortable with the status quo. For me, the question isn’t about individual freedoms and legal rights, those are clear. We are allowed to spray our lawns and shrubs with certain chemicals, undeniably. But, do we really need to?

Talking to the Department of Agriculture combined with my own experience in the lawn care and mosquito control industries gives me hope. We’re moving in a positive direction. Understanding these products and what they do to us and the land is important. Karen is a good role-model for doing our homework and asking questions. It seems, at least from John Scott’s observations, that regulators are working hard to keep pace with companies profiting from pesticide manufacture and application. In the current scheme of things there’s work for all of us to do.

Too often when people, like Karen Hare, raise hard questions they become lightening rods for controversy. Notions of very American freedoms clash with the fact that no one likes to be told what to do, or that their choices might be negatively affecting others. Even aesthetic questions about what makes a beautiful home and landscape get tangled up in this particular conflict. All these values come from somewhere. It’s for each of us to sort them out and we here at Matter Daily are happy Karen presented Fort Collins with an opportunity do some of this tough thinking.