Tuesday, August 10, 2004
State Senate bill aims to snuff out pesticide drift
State Senate bill aims to snuff out pesticide drift
SB 391 would create manufacturer-paid fund to cover illnesses
By Jeff Donaldson
The Desert Sun
August 10, 2004
COACHELLA VALLEY -- Arturo Rodriguez recalls the woman who came into
his office seeking help. She said she became ill when the pesticide spray
from a crop duster drifted from a field into her mobile home park.
While Rodriguez, an attorney with the California Rural Legal Assistance
Office in Coachella, was only able to assist by referring her to a
medical provider, the problem of drifting pesticides is getting widespread
attention in California.
Advocacy groups are rallying to push passage of Senate Bill 391, which
would create a state account funded by pesticide manufacturers to cover the
medical costs of illness brought on by pesticide drift.
Though Rodriguez is not permitted to discuss legislative matters, he
said the issue of pesticide drift is a problem in eastern Coachella Valley,
where high winds pose a danger of blowing chemicals used in fields onto
workers and into nearby communities.
"We've had workers working in fields next to a vineyard who were
sprayed when an airplane flew nearby," Rodriguez said. He added that such
instances are worker's compensation cases and are not handled by his office.
"But it's very difficult to establish a poisoning case. Often there's
no direct link to where the poisoning came from."
It is the medical expense incurred by these workers that prompted Sen.
Dean Florez, D-Shafter, to introduce SB 391. The bill, which pesticide
manufacturers support in concept but not in its current form, could go
before the state Assembly by early next week.
A coalition of advocacy groups also has released a policy brief
designed to put pressure on lawmakers, titled "Better Safe than Sorry: Preventing
Pesticide Drift in California."
According to the report, more than 90 percent of pesticides used in
California are prone to drifting away from where they are applied, and
34 percent of the 188 million pounds of pesticides used in 2000 were
highly toxic to humans.
In Riverside County, the latest statistics from 2002 show that 3.35
million pounds of pesticide are used, the 15th largest amount in the state. In
that time, only two agricultural illnesses were reported, according to the
Department of Pesticide Regulation.
The advocacy groups are calling on the state's pesticide regulators to
phase out six highly toxic, drift-prone pesticides and to more strictly
enforce the application of pesticides on farms around the state.
"This bill primarily affects non-occupational exposures by farm workers
and their communities," said Martha Guzman, a legislative advocate with the
California Rural Legal Assistance Office.
Guzman pointed to the case of some 140 residents who were poisoned by
pesticide drift in Lamont, in Kern County, in 2002.
Steven Beckley, president of the Western Plant Health Association,
which represents pesticide manufacturers and applicators, said the new bill
creates a lot of red tape. The Department of Pesticide Regulation also
has said the state has enough rules to enforce pesticide use.
But Beckley agreed officials should take an "out of the box" look at
how to fund any necessary medical care. "We certainly haven't slammed the door on the senator, saying no, no on this," Beckley said.
Still, Rodriguez said there is enough discrepancy in the way chemicals
are applied that bring the process into question. "In my opinion, I don't know that every (company) out there is following the letter of the law," Rodriguez said. "But as with all pesticide poisoning, unless it's a very obvious case we may not know."
SB 391 would create manufacturer-paid fund to cover illnesses
By Jeff Donaldson
The Desert Sun
August 10, 2004
COACHELLA VALLEY -- Arturo Rodriguez recalls the woman who came into
his office seeking help. She said she became ill when the pesticide spray
from a crop duster drifted from a field into her mobile home park.
While Rodriguez, an attorney with the California Rural Legal Assistance
Office in Coachella, was only able to assist by referring her to a
medical provider, the problem of drifting pesticides is getting widespread
attention in California.
Advocacy groups are rallying to push passage of Senate Bill 391, which
would create a state account funded by pesticide manufacturers to cover the
medical costs of illness brought on by pesticide drift.
Though Rodriguez is not permitted to discuss legislative matters, he
said the issue of pesticide drift is a problem in eastern Coachella Valley,
where high winds pose a danger of blowing chemicals used in fields onto
workers and into nearby communities.
"We've had workers working in fields next to a vineyard who were
sprayed when an airplane flew nearby," Rodriguez said. He added that such
instances are worker's compensation cases and are not handled by his office.
"But it's very difficult to establish a poisoning case. Often there's
no direct link to where the poisoning came from."
It is the medical expense incurred by these workers that prompted Sen.
Dean Florez, D-Shafter, to introduce SB 391. The bill, which pesticide
manufacturers support in concept but not in its current form, could go
before the state Assembly by early next week.
A coalition of advocacy groups also has released a policy brief
designed to put pressure on lawmakers, titled "Better Safe than Sorry: Preventing
Pesticide Drift in California."
According to the report, more than 90 percent of pesticides used in
California are prone to drifting away from where they are applied, and
34 percent of the 188 million pounds of pesticides used in 2000 were
highly toxic to humans.
In Riverside County, the latest statistics from 2002 show that 3.35
million pounds of pesticide are used, the 15th largest amount in the state. In
that time, only two agricultural illnesses were reported, according to the
Department of Pesticide Regulation.
The advocacy groups are calling on the state's pesticide regulators to
phase out six highly toxic, drift-prone pesticides and to more strictly
enforce the application of pesticides on farms around the state.
"This bill primarily affects non-occupational exposures by farm workers
and their communities," said Martha Guzman, a legislative advocate with the
California Rural Legal Assistance Office.
Guzman pointed to the case of some 140 residents who were poisoned by
pesticide drift in Lamont, in Kern County, in 2002.
Steven Beckley, president of the Western Plant Health Association,
which represents pesticide manufacturers and applicators, said the new bill
creates a lot of red tape. The Department of Pesticide Regulation also
has said the state has enough rules to enforce pesticide use.
But Beckley agreed officials should take an "out of the box" look at
how to fund any necessary medical care. "We certainly haven't slammed the door on the senator, saying no, no on this," Beckley said.
Still, Rodriguez said there is enough discrepancy in the way chemicals
are applied that bring the process into question. "In my opinion, I don't know that every (company) out there is following the letter of the law," Rodriguez said. "But as with all pesticide poisoning, unless it's a very obvious case we may not know."
# posted by Senator Dean Florez @ 7:08 AM 
