[Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party elected officials oppose spraying plan
Andrea Dorey
andid at cagreens.org
Tue Apr 29 18:04:58 PDT 2008
Saying it's the safest way isn't saying much.
Spraying for a pest that has not had ANY impact on crops yet is
overkill. We could learn a lot from NZ and AussieLand who (I've
heard on KPFA) deal with this pest very well.
Andi
On Apr 26, 2008, at 8:48 PM, Tian Harter wrote:
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Fwd: Re: Okay, so what is your official take on spraying
> pheromones to get rid od the moths?
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 14:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Caroline Yacoub
> To: Tian Harter <tnharter at aceweb.com>
>
>
>
> Could you please post this? I /get/ the discussion items, but I don't
> know how to add one. My daughter is a former tree farmer, formerly
> worked for the state dept of agriculture, currently works for Fish and
> Game, and is the Greenest person I know.
>
> Note: forwarded message attached.
>
> --
> Tian
> http://tian.greens.org
> 4/25: I inaugurated my new brown XXL shirt made in LA that says "the
> role of the revolutionary artist is to make revolution irresistible!"
> by wearing it in SF's Critical Mass Ride. The weather was just right.
>
>
> My take on this is:
> 1. The pheremone is, from a public health perspective, the SAFEST
> way to deal with this internationally quarantinable pest.
>
> 2. My (old) department MUST do something about this pest because of
> international quarantines.
>
> 3. My department was in error in not holding public comment
> meetings with members of the community including farmers,
> academics, health-concerned citizens in ADVANCE of coming up with a
> plan. If people are clear that some action must be done, that
> insecticides are on the table, but alternatives are being
> prioritized, etc. you are much less likely to have this kind of
> response. I have been meaning to write to my old IPM professor at
> UCSC to see if anyone from my department contacted her or her
> coworkers to serve on a public advisory panel. If not, this was a
> mistake.
>
> 4. I don't think we yet know what the insect's capacity is to
> physically disrupt California's agriculture as a pestiferous
> insect. Discovery of LBAM was done by an ameteur entomologist.
> Farmers had not been bringing in damaged plants looking for a
> solution. However, because it puts commodities under quarantine
> (they cannot be moved out of the area), it causes economic damage
> to farmers. This is enough to warrant action. Our department has
> probably been working with the international community to clarify
> this insects' capacity to do damage in other regions of the world
> (it was a big problem in New Zealand and Australia); survey for
> plant damage from the moth in the affected regions, and reform
> regulations if necessary. Haven't been privvy to much of the
> goings on myself.
>
> In essence, it is a necessary evil; which could have been performed
> better--and ideally should have been approached a little more
> slowly and with more regards for sentiment than science and
> regulation. I disagree with the Green opposition to this work.
> -Rosie
>
>
>
>
> Caroline Yacoub <carolineyacoub at att.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> Note: forwarded message attached.Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008
> 06:06:25 -0700 (PDT)
> From: "Drew Johnson" <JamBoi at Greens.org>
> To: cal-forum at cagreens.org,
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party elected officials oppose
> state aerial
> spraying plan
>
> News Advisory
> THE GREEN PARTY OF CALIFORNIA www.cagreens.org
>
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
> Tuesday, April 22, 2008
> Contact: Susan King, spokesperson, 415.823-5524 sking at cagreens.org
> Dr. Robert Vizzard, spokesperson, 916.206 8953,
> rvizzard at cagreens.org
> Daniel Brezenoff, spokesperson, 310.422-2211
> dbrezenoff at cagreens.org
> Cres Vellucci, GPCA press secretary, 916.996-9170
> cvellucci at cagreens.org
>
> EARTH DAY: Green Party elected supervisor, mayor,
> city councilor, lead battle opposing $74 million state
> plan to spray pesticides to kill Light Brown Apple Moth
>
> BERKELEY, Ca. (April 22, 2008) – Green Party elected officials
> in Bay Area
> cities are helping oppose a $74 million plan by the California
> Department
> of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) to conduct aerial spraying of a
> pheromone
> pesticide to eradicate the Light Brown Apple Moth, scheduled to
> start this
> summer.
>
> Greens have authored resolutions against the spray and are
> participating in
> lawsuits against it. More than 30 cities have now officially
> opposed the
> spraying that Greens describe as "a hazard to human health."
>
> San Francisco Supervisor and Green Ross Mirkarimi – who
> described the
> spraying as a "neutron bomb effect" – was applauded when he
> introduced a
> resolution opposing the spraying campaign, which passed
> unanimously last
> week at the SF Board of Supervisors meeting.
>
> Mirkarimi's San Francisco resolution calls for a long-term
> study by the
> state of the health and environmental impacts of the spraying
> already
> conducted in Monterey and Santa Cruz counties in 2007 in which
> over 600
> residents reported adverse health outcomes, and support for state
> legislation requiring the consent of residents before any
> aerial spraying.
>
> In Berkeley, District 4 City Councilmember Dona Spring, a
> Green, authored a
> resolution against the spray campaign and backed a lawsuit.
> "We've got
> expert testimony that it would pose a hazard to human health so
> it's going
> to be done over some dead bodies," Spring said.
>
> And Richmond Mayor and Green Party member Gayle McLaughlin co-
> sponsored a
> resolution against the spray for the City of Richmond, calling it
> "expensive and ineffective." In an interview she stated, "It's
> very clear
> there are many other ways to address this."
>
> The Green Party's philosophy of local control and grassroots
> democracy may
> help resolve the spray controversy in favor of local public health
> officials, who have expressed concern and recommend using other
> methods.
> Public Health Directors in Alameda County and Santa Cruz County
> have even
> posted letters to state officials calling for consideration of
> different
> and less toxic alternatives. However, state health officials
> believe the
> spray is safe, and are willing to put profits over public
> health, even over
> protest from other public health officials.
> -30-
>
> _______________________________________________
> sosfbay-discuss mailing list
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
>
> From: Rosie Yacoub <rayacoub at yahoo.com>
> Date: April 25, 2008 3:47:55 PM PDT
> To: Caroline Yacoub <carolineyacoub at att.net>
> Subject: Re: Okay, so what is your official take on spraying
> pheromones to get rid od the moths?
>
>
> My take on this is:
> 1. The pheremone is, from a public health perspective, the SAFEST
> way to deal with this internationally quarantinable pest.
>
> 2. My (old) department MUST do something about this pest because of
> international quarantines.
>
> 3. My department was in error in not holding public comment
> meetings with members of the community including farmers,
> academics, health-concerned citizens in ADVANCE of coming up with a
> plan. If people are clear that some action must be done, that
> insecticides are on the table, but alternatives are being
> prioritized, etc. you are much less likely to have this kind of
> response. I have been meaning to write to my old IPM professor at
> UCSC to see if anyone from my department contacted her or her
> coworkers to serve on a public advisory panel. If not, this was a
> mistake.
>
> 4. I don't think we yet know what the insect's capacity is to
> physically disrupt California's agriculture as a pestiferous
> insect. Discovery of LBAM was done by an ameteur entomologist.
> Farmers had not been bringing in damaged plants looking for a
> solution. However, because it puts commodities under quarantine
> (they cannot be moved out of the area), it causes economic damage
> to farmers. This is enough to warrant action. Our department has
> probably been working with the international community to clarify
> this insects' capacity to do damage in other regions of the world
> (it was a big problem in New Zealand and Australia); survey for
> plant damage from the moth in the affected regions, and reform
> regulations if necessary. Haven't been privvy to much of the
> goings on myself.
>
> In essence, it is a necessary evil; which could have been performed
> better--and ideally should have been approached a little more
> slowly and with more regards for sentiment than science and
> regulation. I disagree with the Green opposition to this work.
> -Rosie
>
>
>
>
> Caroline Yacoub <carolineyacoub at att.net> wrote:
>
>
> Note: forwarded message attached.Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 06:06:25
> -0700 (PDT)
> From: "Drew Johnson" <JamBoi at Greens.org>
> To: cal-forum at cagreens.org,
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Green Party elected officials oppose
> state aerial
> spraying plan
>
> News Advisory
> THE GREEN PARTY OF CALIFORNIA www.cagreens.org
>
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
> Tuesday, April 22, 2008
> Contact: Susan King, spokesperson, 415.823-5524 sking at cagreens.org
> Dr. Robert Vizzard, spokesperson, 916.206 8953,
> rvizzard at cagreens.org
> Daniel Brezenoff, spokesperson, 310.422-2211
> dbrezenoff at cagreens.org
> Cres Vellucci, GPCA press secretary, 916.996-9170
> cvellucci at cagreens.org
>
> EARTH DAY: Green Party elected supervisor, mayor,
> city councilor, lead battle opposing $74 million state
> plan to spray pesticides to kill Light Brown Apple Moth
>
> BERKELEY, Ca. (April 22, 2008) – Green Party elected officials in
> Bay Area
> cities are helping oppose a $74 million plan by the California
> Department
> of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) to conduct aerial spraying of a
> pheromone
> pesticide to eradicate the Light Brown Apple Moth, scheduled to
> start this
> summer.
>
> Greens have authored resolutions against the spray and are
> participating in
> lawsuits against it. More than 30 cities have now officially
> opposed the
> spraying that Greens describe as "a hazard to human health."
>
> San Francisco Supervisor and Green Ross Mirkarimi – who described the
> spraying as a "neutron bomb effect" – was applauded when he
> introduced a
> resolution opposing the spraying campaign, which passed unanimously
> last
> week at the SF Board of Supervisors meeting.
>
> Mirkarimi's San Francisco resolution calls for a long-term study by
> the
> state of the health and environmental impacts of the spraying already
> conducted in Monterey and Santa Cruz counties in 2007 in which over
> 600
> residents reported adverse health outcomes, and support for state
> legislation requiring the consent of residents before any aerial
> spraying.
>
> In Berkeley, District 4 City Councilmember Dona Spring, a Green,
> authored a
> resolution against the spray campaign and backed a lawsuit. "We've got
> expert testimony that it would pose a hazard to human health so
> it's going
> to be done over some dead bodies," Spring said.
>
> And Richmond Mayor and Green Party member Gayle McLaughlin co-
> sponsored a
> resolution against the spray for the City of Richmond, calling it
> "expensive and ineffective." In an interview she stated, "It's very
> clear
> there are many other ways to address this."
>
> The Green Party's philosophy of local control and grassroots
> democracy may
> help resolve the spray controversy in favor of local public health
> officials, who have expressed concern and recommend using other
> methods.
> Public Health Directors in Alameda County and Santa Cruz County
> have even
> posted letters to state officials calling for consideration of
> different
> and less toxic alternatives. However, state health officials
> believe the
> spray is safe, and are willing to put profits over public health,
> even over
> protest from other public health officials.
> -30-
>
> _______________________________________________
> sosfbay-discuss mailing list
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
>
>
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
> Try it now.
> _______________________________________________
> sosfbay-discuss mailing list
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20080429/21952659/attachment.html>
More information about the sosfbay-discuss
mailing list