Caged Poultry Farmer’s Imprisonment Justifies Animal Liberators Efforts

The New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) is to be congratulated for successfully prosecuting a poultry farmer for animal welfare offences, but should be exposing other cruel poultry farmers, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.
Gerard Bogaart, trading as Golden Harvest Poultry, was yesterday sentenced by Judge McAuslan to 12 months in prison under the Animal Welfare Act for the wilful ill-treatment of broiler hens and roosters in his care and for two months concurrently for failing to provide for their physical, health and behavioural needs. (1)
“Considering Golden Harvest proudly quotes 46 years in the industry, audits of all large scale broiler hen and egg operations should be undertaken immediately,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning. (2)
“Animal rights activists such as Animal Liberation Front, Auckland Animal Action and SAFE, have been doing fantastic public service in raising the attention of agencies and the public to the cruel practices followed by cage poultry farmers.”
“It appears that NZFSA only showed interest after the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), in 2007, publicised continued animal welfare issues by poultry farmer Gerard Bogaart, who had also been convicted in 1996 for cruelty to sheep in his care. Similar action by ALF in 2004 at Bogaart’s poultry operation had not inspired NZFSA it seems.”(3)
The NZFSA attention against Golden Harvest initially was to get compliance with food safety risk management plans. Animal welfare considerations only followed when enforcement against illegal egg and poultry sales was undertaken.”
“While NZFSA staff became deeply concerned with animal welfare considerations, they should not have waited for more than a year ahead of enforcement, while poultry continued to be treated in a cruel and disgusting way.”
“1100 birds had to be euthanased to relieve their suffering when action against illegal sales was finally taken. Action against all cruel poultry farmers needs to be taken immediately, whether illegally trading or not.”
NZFSA’s media release 25 May included;
“In early 2007 NZFSA served a notice of direction on the company to cease the sale of poultry and eggs as well as slaughter of poultry, which Mr Van Den Bogaart continued to disregard.
Prior to the operation, NZFSA had tried in vain to help Mr Van Den Bogaart make his operation compliant by developing a Risk Management Programme (RMP), which is a legal requirement for all poultry slaughterhouses and all egg producers with more than 100 female birds.
In June 2008 New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) investigators and Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF) investigators – assisted by police, local council officers and a veterinarian – executed NZFSA search warrants on two rural properties in South Auckland that Van Den Bogaart was operating from. This was done under provisions of the Animal Products Act on the basis of the suspected illegal slaughter and sale of poultry and eggs to a number of Auckland retailers.”
“Compliance with food safety was never going to attend to all animal welfare concerns, and NZFSA’s Risk Management Programme for poultry makes little difference to human health in NZ. However, the removal of all caged and crate farming operations would improve animal welfare conditions for millions of chickens, ducks, and pigs,” said Mr Browning.
“Clearly, Bogaart and his Golden Harvest operation was a bad example among poultry farmers, but all caged poultry farmers need immediate inspection.”
“Bogaart has been removed from his cruel business, but the leaders of the cruel caged poultry industry best not feel complacent. Thinking consumers and animal welfare proponents such as Soil & Health will not rest until the hens are out of the cages.”
Soil & Health supports humane free range and organic poultry farming which fits with its vision of an Organic 2020.
Notes:

Links accessed May 2010
(1) http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/publications/media-releases/2010/2010-01-22-van-den-bogaart-sentencing.htm
(2) http://www.finda.co.nz/business/listing/y0rl/golden-harvest-poultry/
(3) http://www.indymedia.org.nz/article/72934/activists-liberate-25-battery-hens-convi

USA GE trees approval will reflect negatively on NZ

The approval by the United States GE regulator for 260,000 New Zealand raised genetically engineered (GE) eucalyptus trees for 28 field trials through seven US states is not something for New Zealand to be proud of, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ. (1)

“New Zealand trades on a clean green 100% Pure brand and the best value customers for New Zealand are the discerning first world baby boomer consumers that choose GE free, animal friendly, sustainably produced and organic type products. Thousands of those potential customers submitted in opposition to the NZ raised GE trees.” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Last year Jim Hightower, a twice elected Texas Agriculture Commissioner and U.S. national commentator described the then intended growing as “Irresponsible, Dangerous, and Stupid. Hightower, who identified the trees as sourced from New Zealand, broadcasts daily radio commentaries carried by more than 150 commercial and public stations, as well as on the web.” (2)

The United States Department of Agriculture – Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA-APHIS) yesterday approved applications by ArborGen, a biotechnology company owned by three big forest products companies: International Paper and MeadWestvaco of the United States, and Rubicon of New Zealand. The applications allow the trees to flower in 27 of the 28 trial sites.

The 260,000 GE eucalypts were grown in New Zealand by Horizon 2, which is based near Whakatane, and part of Rubicon’s (ex Fletcher Forests) partnership ArborGen. ArborGen also has a collaborative GE tree development contract with Scion, the former Forest Research Institute.

The USDA confirmed it had received comments opposing the field trial from 12,462 people or organizations, compared with only 45 supporters of the trial. However environmental groups had thought up to 17,000 people had submitted.

“The USDA discounted the importance of many submissions due their being nearly identical form letters, but those submitters came from environmental and consumer organisations whose members match the type of consumers identified as New Zealand’s best value customers,” said Mr Browning.

“Just last week Agriculture Minister David Carter reminded dairy farmers at their conference that New Zealand’s best value markets were those aware of our clean green image and were becoming more discerning, saying, “Our international customers are becoming more discerning. If we are to satisfy their demands, we must recognise their concerns.” (3)

New Zealand cannot have it both ways according to Soil & Health.

“Significant conversion to more sustainable and organic primary production is in keeping with the identified market advantage but sustainable best value production cannot coexist with GE crops or exports.”

“New Zealand is essentially GE free with only two GE field trial locations operating and one of them subject to legal appeals by GE Free NZ. However continued involvement with giant biotech firms by New Zealand researchers and companies threatens disestablishing New Zealand’s GE free status.”

AgResearch wants to expand development of GE animals in New Zealand for the United States dominant biopharmaceutical company, Genzyme, and intends the introduction of GE ryegrass and clover into New Zealand pastures.  Scion, has a new GE pine tree trial at Rotorua, and with Rubicon is involved with the export of hundreds of thousands of GE trees for ArborGen, the worlds giant biotech tree company. Rubicon has stated that it wants commercialisation of GE forests in New Zealand to have less regulatory impediments.

“Scion and Rubicon’s involvement with large-scale GE brings shame to New Zealand’s clean, green GE free reputation as when the UN Convention on Biological Diversity has been grappling with designing controls for GE trees, New Zealand sided with pro-GE countries, opposing others who were calling for suspension of GE tree release until more conclusive proof of environmental safety was available,” says Mr Browning. (4)

“Scion scientists then reported without independent review, that their brief field trials proved environmental safety. The report was treated with disdain by other scientists.” (5)

“Poor science with a New Zealand label also has the potential to ruin the clean green reputation that New Zealand’s biggest earners, primary production and tourism, currently enjoy.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 and is opposed to GE in food and environment.

 

NOTES:

(1)   http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/content/2010/05/ge_eucalyptus.shtml

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/biotech_ea_permits.html

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/fedregister/BRS_20100512.pdf

(2)    http://www.organicnz.org/soil-and-health-press/nz-ge-trees-irresponsible/

(3)     http://davidcarter.co.nz/index.php?/categories/6-Speeches/P2.html

(4)   http://www.organicnz.org/soil-and-health-press/ge-tree-reputation/

(5)   http://www.organicnz.org/soil-and-health-press/1021/scion%E2%80%99s-ge-t…

Heinemann, J.A., and T. Traavik. 2004. Problems in monitoring horizontal gene transfer in field trials of transgenic plants. Nat. Biotechnol. 22:1105-1109.

Increased Science Funding, An Opportunity For Clean And Green NZ

The Budget’s new science funding increase should speed correction of key flaws in New Zealand’s Clean Green 100% Pure environmental reputation, and boost conversion to organic agriculture and horticulture, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.
Soil & Health asserts that the implementation of alternatives to both aerial 1080 drops and methyl bromide release to the atmosphere, along with a redirection of science funding away from genetic engineering (GE) development and field trials, would instantly improve New Zealand’s best primary production and tourism marketing advantage.
“Replacing GE, methyl bromide release and the broad-scale use of pesticides such as aerial spraying of 1080 is critical if we are to retain credibility with our tourists and best value export customers,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“Agriculture Minister David Carter spoke to over 700 dairy farmers at Dairy NZ’s conference last week and correctly pointed out the importance of New Zealand’s clean green image and animal welfare record to our best value export markets. Yet at that same event Dairy NZ, with speakers from Ministry of Research Science and Technology (MoRST) and AgResearch, boldly promoted the development of GE crops and in particular GE ryegrass.”
“Although theoretically “keeping the options open”, by having the pro-GE speakers, Dairy NZ failed to present speakers that could show the significant failings of GE internationally, to both farming communities and the environment, and the market distrust of such production. GE cannot co-exist with best practice and market friendly sustainable production.”
“GE is not compatible with the export markets the Minister identified, neither is the release of ozone depleting neurotoxic methyl bromide gas by our log exporters. Neither is the broad-scale use of 1080 and herbicides.”
“The new science funding in primary production must not be wasted with the old business elite or fast buck science clique but used for a genuinely sustainable future.”
“Organic and genuinely sustainable production, and humane and environmentally benign alternatives to current pest control chemicals get far too little funding, yet the same politico-business-science culture that has created New Zealand’s sustainability problems continues funding technologies that pave the way for more environmental and marketing disasters.”
“When will our political, science and farming leaders get it? The branding is the vision. The branding is the economic and environmental future for New Zealand. It is not to be a sham but a reality. Clean green 100% Pure New Zealand.”
“Development of chemical nitrification inhibitors, genetically engineered ryegrass and clovers, and monoculture forests of chemically dependent radiata clones are a misuse of science and extension funding. None are genuinely sustainable and smack of corporate greed and an ignorance of the world around us,” said Mr Browning.
“Dumping GE, scaling up infrastructure for recapture of toxic fumigant gases such as methyl bromide, speeding development of alternatives to 1080 and other risky pesticides, and promoting the best practice animal welfare and organic production examples to New Zealand’s producers and customers will give technical and economic gains New Zealand can be proud of.”
Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 that fits well with the clean green 100% Pure NZ branding the government recognises. Science and extension services funding must urgently and genuinely follow that vision.

AgResearch’s Cruel Experiments Cover A Wide Range of Animals

New revelations of cruel outcomes on experimental genetically engineered (GE) calves at AgResearch’s GE facility are likely to be just the tip of the iceberg according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.
“AgResearch already has a bad track record with its Annual Reports to ERMA for GE cattle showing a less than 9 % live birth rate, deformed foetuses and calves, gangrenous udders and animals suffering from respiratory conditions,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.(1)
The Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) last year also granted AgResearch permission to experiment on cats, dogs, pigs, guinea pigs, sheep, mice, rats, rabbits, possums, cattle, goats, and chickens using genetic material from almost any form of life.(2)
“How many cats and dogs, rabbits and guinea pigs, mice, cattle, and other animals are to suffer for AgResearch’s unnecessary experiments?”
“AgResearch’s media tour last year showed off apparently healthy cattle but they were just the lucky survivors. It is now evident that some calves ovaries were growing to the point of rupture, causing death, but the scientist in charge Dr Jimmy Suttie has been quoted as saying the deaths are not a big deal.”(3)
“Animal welfare is a big deal, especially when there are animal free alternative experimental and production methods for the compounds that AgResearch ultimately wants to produce,” said Mr Browning.
“Science Minister Wayne Mapp and Agriculture Minister David Carter have both shown acceptance of AgResearch’s poor animal welfare record, presumably a ‘pragmatic’ response to the dubious promises of high financial returns that AgResearch’s international partners have said will be coming.”
“However good animal welfare records and a GE free reputation are very important for New Zealand’s trading image and increasingly demanded by consumers. Cruel experiments for a GE farming future are not what either New Zealanders or valuable overseas consumers want.”(4)
“AgResearch is at the cruel operator end of a business partnership with a dirty drug manufacturer, Genzyme, who is under investigation by the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) for poor manufacturing practices.” (5)
“Knowing that it would be a nuisance for AgResearch and its overseas partners, the government disbanded the New Zealand Bioethics Council a year ago in full knowledge that distressing animal welfare issues are clearly predictable in GE research. The Bioethics Council had been calling for ethics reviews of all GE animal experiments.” (6)
Soil & Health wants AgResearch’s cruel animal experiments stopped immediately, the reinstatement of the New Zealand Bioethics Council, and the government to quickly move towards desirable high value sustainable, animal friendly, GE free and organic production.

Notes:

Links assessed March 2010
(1) http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/no/compliance/agresearch.html ERMA Annual reports on GMF98009 and GMD 02028
(2) http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/BertDocs/GMD09011%20decision%20final%20(2009.09.04).pdf
“Donor genetic material may be derived from the Kingdoms Animalia, Planta, Fungi, Protista and Monera and viruses and viroids…”
(3) http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10642031
(4) https://soilandhealth.org.nz/media-releases/kiwi-poll-rejects-ge-animals/
(5) http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/genzyme/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&ndmConfigId=1019673&newsId=20100324005866&newsLang=en http://www.marketwatch.com/story/genzyme-to-pay-175-million-for-allston-plant-woes-2010-04-21http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2124303620100421
(6) http://www.mfe.govt.nz/website/closed-sites/images/bioethics.jpg New Zealand Bioethics Council, August 2004 Report: The Cultural, Ethical and Spiritual Dimensions of the Use of Human Genes in Other Organisms

Picton Methyl Bromide Gas Release Risky Again

The Picton community was tonight again at risk of methyl bromide fumigation gas exposure, as log fumigators in Shakespeare Bay released tons of the neurotoxic gas with light breeze flowing onto Picton according to eyewitnesses.
Logs in the hold of the 170m ship Pontonostos and up to 20 stacks of wharfside logs have been fumigated with the highly toxic gas over the last 24 hours.
With an absence of air modelling to identify the direction of the invisible gas plume being released throughout the evening, Soil & Health Association spokesperson Steffan Browning monitored the activity from the port lookout and followed Port Marlborough’s Live Weather website. (1) Winds were light and predominantly from the north west passing the fumigation site through the Cook Strait ferry terminals, harbour and rail yards into Picton township.
Local environmental group Guardians of the Sounds and the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand have led calls for the halt or recapture of methyl bromide fumigation in Picton and are members of the The Coalition against the use of Methyl Bromide which protested in Picton, Wellington and Tauranga recently as part of the Trade Unions Workers Memorial Day. This year there was particular reference to the men who had died from motor neurone disease in Nelson following exposure to methyl bromide fumigant at Port Nelson.
“I am concerned about the potential cumulative effect from these repeat fumigations on our Picton community,” said Guardians of the Sounds chairman Pete Beech. “Tonights fumigation is to be repeated for another log ship the Duncan Bay waiting to dock.”
“The deaths of the seaman in the hold of the log ship at Marsden Point today, whether caused by methyl bromide gas or not, reminds us of the deadly risks associated with this gas, given that it is tasteless, odourless and invisible and being heavier than air is known to linger.”
“With no odour, the people of Picton and workers have no idea whether they are exposed to the fumigant gas,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning. “We do know that the monitoring for Port Marlborough is not likely to detect the majority of the gas plume as air modelling has not occurred.”
“One Picton resident who has experienced ill health following fumigations moved through to Blenheim for the night to avoid the fumigant. He is also protesting the Marlborough District Council’s poor handling of the methyl bromide issue locally.”
“Once again the so called independent monitoring company was employing fumigation staff to check monitoring devices on Port Shakespeare’s fences. This is a direct conflict of interest.”
“The tarpaulins were removed consecutively from log stacks in about a minute each releasing the gas in a sequence of more concentrated plumes while the fumigant gas in the ships hold was being released continuously through the evening.”
Soil & Health will present to the Environmental Risk Management Authority’s (ERMA) methyl bromide reassessment hearing in Wellington on May 17, and Pete Beech will speak to the Guardians of the Sounds submission in Picton May 19. Other hearings that week will be in Nelson, Tauranga and Auckland. Many submitters have called for the use of recapture technology for methyl bromide gas after fumigation.
Soil & Health aspires to an Organic 2020 where biosecurity can be protected without the release to the environment of toxic gases.
NOTES:
(1) http://www.portmarlborough.co.nz/Live%20Weather
Soil & Health’s response to ERMA’s 5 November 2009 Evaluation & Review recommendations report is copied further below.
———————-
ERMAs Chemical Cowboy Approach To Methyl Bromide Branded Reckless
Nov 6, 2009
ERMA’s methyl bromide control recommendations, released yesterday, are among the most reckless in the world with little regard for human and environmental safety, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ. (1)
“Releasing a gas that seriously depletes our ozone layer and is a known neurotoxin, and allowing bystanders to be as close as 50 metres from the release of up to 1000kg of that gas is outrageous. This has to be one of ERMA’s worst,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.(2)
Tonnes of methyl bromide fumigant gas are released to air from under tarpaulins or ships holds following each log fumigation, with smaller amounts being released from containers used for fumigation of imported and export goods.
“With no mandatory air modelling recommended, monitoring is useless and fumigators are only making assumptions of where this invisible, odourless and dangerous fumigant will go. It should be asked why ERMA puts restrictions on anything. This report has to be one of the clearest examples of how New Zealand’s environmental, health and safety regulatory bodies are failing the community.”
The recommendations are part of the Environmental Risk Management Authority’s (ERMA) current reassessment of methyl bromide. The reassessment comes at a time when log exports are soaring. Export log fumigations account for more than 80% of the methyl bromide used in New Zealand. Although originally aiming to phase out the use of methyl bromide gas by next year as part of the ozone-focused Montreal Protocol, New Zealand is now using close to 10 times the amount of methyl bromide gas than it was in 2001.
“The dominant focus of ERMA’s report is on effects to the market economy. This means ERMA is functioning more as an Economic Risk Management Authority. The environmental and human safety hazards are clearly secondary to New Zealand’s big business interests,” said Mr Browning.
“Soil & Health is not opposed to the use of methyl bromide for fumigation for biosecurity purposes either, but the release of hundreds of tonnes of the extremely toxic gas near local communities and its inevitable effect on climate change is unacceptable.”
“Recapturing the gas, as is done in Nelson and overseas, should have been demanded by ERMA throughout New Zealand, and gas recapture infrastructure quickly developed by the log exporters. However cost has once again been allowed to come before the health and safety of New Zealanders.”
Tasmania has already made methyl bromide recapture mandatory for quarantine treatment, and the European Parliament has banned the use of methyl bromide within the European Union (EU) from March 18, 2010. (3)
“Methyl bromide due to its damage of the ozone layer has a much greater effect on climate change than carbon dioxide, yet ERMA is hiding behind the fact that man made ozone hole damage appears to be lessening. So now New Zealand is blatantly taking advantage of everyone else fixing the problem.”
“With ERMA’s chemical cowboy approach, New Zealand is once again demeaning its clean green 100% Pure reputation.”
Soil & Health has been involved with several ERMA reassessments and other hearings, and believes the ERMA submission process now open to the public until 18 December, is unlikely to make significant changes to the recommendations.
Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 that will not include release to air of dangerous ozone depleting fumigants.
References
(1) http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/resources/publications/pdfs/Methyl%20Bromide%20Reassessment%20Application.pdf
(2) Extract from ERMA’s Methyl Bromide Reassessment Application

1. The Agency proposes the adoption of the following tolerable exposure limits (TELs):
TEL(chronic)

TEL(acute)24 hour average

TEL (acute)1 hour

0.005 mg/m3

1.3 mg/m3

3.9 mg/m3

1.3 ppb

333 ppb

1000 ppb

0.0013 ppm

0.333 ppm

1 ppm
2. The Agency proposes that the following minimum buffer zones (the downwind distance between the ventilation release location and any non-occupational bystander) be observed when ventilation occurs:
Situation

Buffer zone

Ship‘s hold (greater than 1000 kg methyl bromide used)

100m

Ship‘s hold (less than 1000 kg)

50m

Logs/timber under covers outdoors and indoors (without recapture technology)

50m

Shipping containers

25m
Note 1: Non-occupational bystanders include not just those persons living in nearby residential properties but also those who may be temporarily present in a location, for example, walking on footpaths.
(3) European Union
B1.2.1 At its meeting on March 25, 2009, the European Parliament banned the use of methyl bromide within the European Union (EU) from March 18, 2010. This ban is significantly sooner than the 2015 phase-out originally proposed by the European Commission and supported by EU governments.
B1.2.2 The ban covers the use of methyl bromide as a pesticide, as well as its use for QPS purposes prior to transport. This ban includes the gassing of containers to control vermin. The only remaining exceptions to the ban will be the use of methyl bromide for analytical use in laboratories and for its use in emergencies, such as where a large-scale epidemic occurs (methyl bromide used for emergencies may be used for a period not exceeding 120 days and up to a quantity not exceeding 20 metric tonnes).
B1.2.3 The calculated level of methyl bromide which may be used in the period from 1 January 2010 to 18 March 2010 in the EU is not to exceed 45 (ODP) tonnes. Until 18 March 2010 methyl bromide may be placed on the market and used for QPS purposes for treatment of goods for export, under the condition that at least 80 % of methyl bromide released from the consignment is recovered.

Soil & Health Congratulates ERMA

The recommendations by the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) staff that the Authority declines AgResearch’s four very broad applications for more genetically engineered (GE) animals was praised by the Soil & Health Association of NZ, which is generally seen as a critic of ERMA.
Soil & Health says that without such a recommendation, ERMA would have less reason for existence as any GE application would meet approval. ERMA has previously supported GE applications.
AgResearch submitted four applications to import, develop, and field test genetically engineered (GM/GE) organisms with an unlimited range of genetic modifications, techniques and traits for an unlimited duration and for use within indoor or outdoor containment facilities at unspecified locations. Ahead of a proposed June hearing, the ERMA staff Evaluation and Review Report, in recommending the applications be declined, said that not being able to identify the range of GE organisms means that they were unable to identify the nature of the organism or associated hazards.
However Soil & Health says that previous AgResearch GE animal applications approved by ERMA are also too broad and without actual GE organisms being identified, and ERMA is now using semantics in response to legal challenges driven by GE Free NZ. (1)
“It is very pleasing that ERMA has made the recommendations, but by suggesting that the lack of a description of the range of genetic modifications drove its decision, it fails to acknowledge that the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO Act) requires individual GE constructs and organisms to be identified. It also fails to acknowledge that it has previously approved other applications with similar shortcomings,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“ERMA has already been granting applications that have equally broad ranges, with a decision last September allowing AgResearch to experiment on cats, dogs, pigs, guinea pigs, sheep, mice, rats, rabbits, possums, cattle, goats, and chickens using genetic material from almost any form of life.”(2)
“That decision included, “Donor genetic material may be derived from the Kingdoms Animalia, Planta, Fungi, Protista and Monera and viruses and viroids…”.”
“While the location and the actual host organisms were identified, as were some general intentions of the research, the GE organisms were not, and so although ERMA was unable to identify the nature of the organism or associated hazards, it approved that application.”
“For hazard control, ERMA relied only on a series of exclusions around pathogenic organisms and on AgResearch meeting containment standards. But unintended results are standard with genetic engineering and containment breaches are common. ERMA and the community must be able to identify any new organism and comment on the associated known or potential associated risks.”
“Today’s recommendation follows GE Free NZ’s previous legal challenges and opens the door for reassessment of previous decisions.”
“Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 and will continue to oppose the cruel experimentation of GE animals. Genetic engineering has not brought any of the benefits promised by its advocates, but has caused considerable harm in many parts of the world. GE does not fit with New Zealand’s clean green trading image or the wishes of most New Zealanders.”
1. CIV-2008-485-2370 GE Free NZ v ERMA
2. http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/BertDocs/GMD09011%20decision%20final%20(2009.09.04).pdf

Muesli – not as healthy as it seems, unless it’s organic

The latest results from the New Zealand Food Safety Authority’s (NZFSA) Total Diet Survey raise concerns about the number of pesticides being found in muesli.
The 4th quarter sampling for the 2009 Total Diet Survey focussed on the most commonly purchased brands of processed foods, obtained in Christchurch. (1)
Residues of ten pesticides were found in four samples of muesli (2). Of these, six are on the Pesticide Action Network (PAN) International List of Highly Hazardous Pesticides for a progressive global phase-out, because of the hazard they pose to human health – mainly cancer and/or endocrine disruption.
Bran cereal was not far behind the muesli, with a total of eight pesticides.
“Both cancer and endocrine disruption can result from low levels of exposure to pesticides, so when your morning muesli contains a mixture of six pesticides each of which has these effects, then the effect is magnified, and your breakfast may be posing an unhealthy risk to you” said Dr Meriel Watts of Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa New Zealand (PANANZ).
“Yet once again, the Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) is downplaying the findings. Still slavishly adhering to an outdated process of simply checking that each residue is below the legal level, they refuse to look at the reality of the situation that consumers face: daily exposure to low dose mixtures of chemicals, each of which by itself is known to cause cancer and/or endocrine or hormonal disruption, but which when added together may dramatically increase the risk,” said Dr Watts.
“The Authority needs to take on board a recent massive EU report which concluded regulatory authorities needed to consider mixtures. (3)
Overall, 25 pesticides were found in 33 food types; 19 of these pesticides are on PAN International’s List of highly Hazardous pesticides.
“Of particular concern are piperonyl butoxide (a synergist used to increase the effect of pyrethroid & carbamate insecticides), found in 15 foods, and the dithiocarbamate fungicides, found in 13 out of 20 foods,” commented Alison White of the Safe Food Campaign.
“Both may cause cancer and endocrine disruption. No safe level for carcinogens and endocrine disruptors has been established. Mancozeb, a common dithiocarbamate fungicide, has a breakdown product which may cause birth defects and genetic damage as well. We don’t need pesticides like this in our food and they pose an unacceptable risk to the baby in the womb.”
“Certified organic muesli doesn’t have pesticide residues such as NZFSA have found. Organic muesli contains ingredients that have been certified as being produced without the use of dangerous pesticides,” said Soil & Health Association spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“NZFSA needs to come clean about the difference between organic and other processed foods. While it is comforting to see reduced residues than in the past in raisins/sultanas samples, there were still too many and the brand that did not show any residues was probably organic. However NZFSA do not disclose that distinction or that of the brand of the worst offenders such as the bran flake cereal brand containing 8 different pesticide residues.”
“Consumers deserve to know who the bad offenders are and which products are the best. For example one wine brand of four, including both white and red wines stood out as having no pesticide residues. That producer, as with the raisin/sultana sample, deserves consumer recognition. From earlier surveys, we know that consumers are best to buy organic.”
References and analysis tables further below.
NOTES
(1) Results can be found on the NZFSA website at http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/science/research-projects/total-diet-survey/q4-2009-nztds-analytical-report-final-april-10.pdf
(2) Chlorpyrifos, cyprodinil, dichlorvos, fenitrothion, isoprocarb, phenthoate, piperonyl butoxide, pirimiphos-methyl, procymidone, pyrimethanil.
(3) * Kortenkamp & Backhaus. 2009. State of the Art Report on Mixture Toxicity. Final Report .Executive Summary. 22 December 2009.
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/pdf/report_Mixture%20toxicity.pdf

Scientific research has repeatedly demonstrated that the effects of mixtures are considerably more pronounced than the effect of each of its individual components and that environmental pollution is from chemical mixtures and not from individual substances. This clearly underlines the need for dedicated regulatory considerations of the problem of chemical mixtures.
(4)
Analysis TDS 4th Quarter 2009 – NZFSA
Meriel Watts, PAN ANZ; April 21, 2010
Analysis:
* 25 pesticides found in 33 food types
* of these, 19 are on PAN International’s list of Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs)(highlighted in red)
* most common pesticides = piperonyl butoxide (in 15 foods), dithiocarbamate fungicides (in 12 out of 20 foods); and pirimiphos-methyl (in 11 foods).
o Piperonyl butoxide = possible carcinogen, endocrine disruptor (HHP)
o Dithiocarbamate fungicides: probable carcinogens, endocrine disruptors (HHPs)
o Pirimiphos-methyl – oestrogenic activity reported, can cause inflammation and allergic reactions (not on HHP list)
* Most contaminated foods = muesli (10 pesticides), bran flake cereal (8 pesticides), biscuits, plain sweet (7 pesticides).
Chlorpyrifos (insecticide)

Brand 1

Brand 2

Brand 3

Brand 4

Bran flake cereal

 

 

 

 

Muesli

 

 

 

 

Rice, white

 

 

 

 

Snack bars

 

 

 

 

Cypermethrin (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Bran flake cereal

 

 

 

 

Cyprodinil (fungicide)

 

 

 

 

Bran flake cereal

 

 

 

 

Muesli

 

 

 

 

Wine, still red

 

 

 

 

4,4 DDE (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Cheese

 

 

 

 

Ice cream

 

 

 

 

Deltamethrin (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, plain sweet

 

 

 

 

Pasta, dried

 

 

 

 

Diazinon (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, plain sweet

 

 

 

 

Dichlorvos (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, chocolate

 

 

 

 

Muesli

 

 

 

 

Dicofol (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Bran flake cereal

 

 

 

 

Diphenylamine (fungicide)

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, plain sweet

 

 

 

 

Infant weaning food, custard/fruit dish

 

 

 

 

Diuron (herbicide)

 

 

 

 

Cheese

 

 

 

 

EPN (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Fish fingers

 

 

 

 

Ethion (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Noodles, instant

 

 

 

 

Snacks, flavoured

 

 

 

 

Fenitrothion (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, plain sweet

 

 

 

 

Muesli

 

 

 

 

Oats, rolled

 

 

 

 

Pasta, dried

 

 

 

 

Fludioxonil (fungicide)

 

 

 

 

Bran flake cereal

 

 

 

 

Imazalil (fungicide)

 

 

 

 

Infant weaning food, custard/fruit dish

 

 

 

 

Isoprocarb (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Apricots, canned

 

 

 

 

Muesli

 

 

 

 

wine, still white

 

 

 

 

Malathion (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, chocolate

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, plain sweet

 

 

 

 

Snacks, flavoured

 

 

 

 

Phenthoate (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Muesli

 

 

 

 

Piperonyl-butoxide (synergist for pyrethroid & carbamate insecticides)

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, chocolate

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, cracker

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, plain sweet

 

 

 

 

Chocolate, plain milk

 

 

 

 

Cornflakes

 

 

 

 

Fishfingers

 

 

 

 

Muesli

 

 

 

 

Pasta, dried

 

 

 

 

Peanut butter

 

 

 

 

Potato crisps

 

 

 

 

Prunes, pitless

 

 

 

 

Raisins/sultanas

 

 

 

 

Snack bars

 

 

 

 

Snack bars, flavoured

 

 

 

 

Spaghetti in sauce, canned

 

 

 

 

Pirimiphos-methyl (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, chocolate

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, cracker

 

 

 

 

Biscuits, plain sweet

 

 

 

 

Bran flake cereal

 

 

 

 

Fishfingers

 

 

 

 

Muesli

 

 

 

 

Noodles, instant

 

 

 

 

Oats, rolled

 

 

 

 

Snack bars

 

 

 

 

Snack bars, flavoured

 

 

 

 

Spaghetti in sauce, canned

 

 

 

 

Procymidone (fungicide)

 

 

 

 

Bran flake cereal

 

 

 

 

Muesli

 

 

 

 

Raisins/sultanas

 

 

 

 

Snack bars

 

 

 

 

Tomatoes in juice, canned

 

 

 

 

Propargite (insecticide)

 

 

 

 

Bran flake cereal

 

 

 

 

Snack bars

 

 

 

 

Propham (plant growth regulator)

 

 

 

 

Potato crisps

 

 

 

 

Propiconazole (fungicide)

 

 

 

 

Rice, white

 

 

 

 

Pyrimethanil (fungicide)

 

 

 

 

Muesli

 

 

 

 

Raisins/sultanas

 

 

 

 

Snack bars

 

 

 

 

Wine, still red

 

 

 

 

Dithiocarbamates (fungicides)(in 12 our of 20 foods)

 

 

 

 

Apricots, canned

 

 

 

 

Beans, frozen

 

 

 

 

Beetroot, canned

 

 

 

 

Corn, canned

 

 

 

 

Infant weaning food, savoury dish

 

 

 

 

Peaches, canned

 

 

 

 

Peas, frozen

 

 

 

 

Potato crisps

 

 

 

 

Prunes, pitless

 

 

 

 

Raisins/sultanas

 

 

 

 

Tomatoes sauce, canned

 

 

 

 

Tomatoes in juice, canned

Protest Against Methyl Bromide Gas Release

Protests beginning in Picton Friday April 23 against toxic methyl bromide fumigant gas being released into the environment are being co-ordinated nationally in respect of Workers Memorial Day on April 28.

Guardians of the Sounds, Soil & Health Association of NZ and the Green Party have been campaigning in Picton for several years on the issue and will be joined by union representatives on Friday.

The protests will continue in Wellington on Monday 26 April and Tauranga 28 April.

“Environmental and food safety NGOs joining in a coalition with the unions representing many of the workers exposed to the dangerous fumigant gas is a step up in opposition against the use and release of methyl bromide,” said Soil & Health New Zealand spokeperson Steffan Browning.

“Methyl bromide gas release to the environment following biosecurity fumigation, damages the ozone layer and influences climate change affecting everyone, but has a very individual and nasty risk to worker and community health for those exposed to fumigation gases.”

“New Zealand is flat out increasing the use of methyl bromide while the rest of the world in accordance with the Montreal Protocol is phasing the toxic gas out. Alternative management is possible, but the perpetrators of health and environmental harm are dodging paying for improvements by using ERMA’s complicity with economic priorities.”

The April 28 Workers Memorial Day honours workers killed during their employment and is particularly pertinent for those that have died from motor neurone disease following methyl bromide exposure at Port Nelson and elsewhere.

“While science has not yet completed the link between methyl bromide and motor neurone disease, the Nelson statistics support the very high liklihood of it being the cause of several port worker deaths. The statistics will be all the more damning when Nelson port workers who have moved elsewhere, ahead of motor neurone disease overcoming them, are included in the statistics.”

Methyl bromide fumigation was banned in Europe last month and is currently being removed from agricultural use in the United States due to its range of toxic effects and ozone depletion.

The Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) has received 92 submissions to its methyl bromide reassessment process, with about 40% wanting to speak to their submissions. ERMA has set five hearings to be held 17 – 21 May in Wellington, then Nelson, Picton/Blenheim, Tauranga, and Auckland. Members of the public are welcome to attend the hearings, though only submitters may speak. Soil & Health will be presenting to their submission in Wellington Monday 17 May.

The Coalition against the use of Methyl Bromide includes Soil & Health, Combined Trade Unions, Guardians of the Sounds, The Green Party, Maritime Union of NZ, The Rail and Maritime Transport Union, Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa New Zealand, Safe Food Campaign,  Marlborough Environment Centre, Alliance Party and others, and is focused on ensuring recapture of fumigant into filters rather than environmental release, should there be continued use of methyl bromide beyond ERMA’s reassessment process.

Soil & Health welcomes the breadth of support against methyl bromide and aspires to an Organic 2020 where biosecurity can be protected without the release to the environment of toxic gases.

Ends.

NOTES:

Soil & Health’s response to ERMA’s 5 November 2009 Evaluation & Review recommendations report is copied further below.

 

ERMAs Chemical Cowboy Approach To Methyl Bromide Branded Reckless

Nov 6, 2009

ERMA’s methyl bromide control recommendations, released yesterday, are among the most reckless in the world with little regard for human and environmental safety, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ. (1)

“Releasing a gas that seriously depletes our ozone layer and is a known neurotoxin, and allowing bystanders to be as close as 50 metres from the release of up to 1000kg of that gas is outrageous. This has to be one of ERMA’s worst,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.(2)

Tonnes of methyl bromide fumigant gas are released to air from under tarpaulins or ships holds following each log fumigation, with smaller amounts being released from containers used for fumigation of imported and export goods.

“With no mandatory air modelling recommended, monitoring is useless and fumigators are only making assumptions of where this invisible, odourless and dangerous fumigant will go. It should be asked why ERMA puts restrictions on anything. This report has to be one of the clearest examples of how New Zealand’s environmental, health and safety regulatory bodies are failing the community.”

The recommendations are part of the Environmental Risk Management Authority’s (ERMA) current reassessment of methyl bromide. The reassessment comes at a time when log exports are soaring. Export log fumigations account for more than 80% of the methyl bromide used in New Zealand. Although originally aiming to phase out the use of methyl bromide gas by next year as part of the ozone-focused Montreal Protocol, New Zealand is now using close to 10 times the amount of methyl bromide gas than it was in 2001.

“The dominant focus of ERMA’s report is on effects to the market economy. This means ERMA is functioning more as an Economic Risk Management Authority. The environmental and human safety hazards are clearly secondary to New Zealand’s big business interests,” said Mr Browning.

“Soil & Health is not opposed to the use of methyl bromide for fumigation for biosecurity purposes either, but the release of hundreds of tonnes of the extremely toxic gas near local communities and its inevitable effect on climate change is unacceptable.”

“Recapturing the gas, as is done in Nelson and overseas, should have been demanded by ERMA throughout New Zealand, and gas recapture infrastructure quickly developed by the log exporters. However cost has once again been allowed to come before the health and safety of New Zealanders.”

Tasmania has already made methyl bromide recapture mandatory for quarantine treatment, and the European Parliament has banned the use of methyl bromide within the European Union (EU) from March 18, 2010. (3)

“Methyl bromide due to its damage of the ozone layer has a much greater effect on climate change than carbon dioxide, yet ERMA is hiding behind the fact that man made ozone hole damage appears to be lessening. So now New Zealand is blatantly taking advantage of everyone else fixing the problem.”

“With ERMA’s chemical cowboy approach, New Zealand is once again demeaning its clean green 100% Pure reputation.”

Soil & Health has been involved with several ERMA reassessments and other hearings, and believes the ERMA submission process now open to the public until 18 December, is unlikely to make significant changes to the recommendations.

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 that will not include release to air of dangerous ozone depleting fumigants.

References
(1) http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/resources/publications/pdfs/Methyl%20Bromide%2…
(2) Extract from ERMA’s Methyl Bromide Reassessment Application

1. The Agency proposes the adoption of the following tolerable exposure limits (TELs):

TEL(chronic)
TEL(acute)24 hour average
TEL (acute)1 hour

0.005 mg/m3
1.3 mg/m3
3.9 mg/m3

1.3 ppb
333 ppb
1000 ppb

0.0013 ppm
0.333 ppm
1 ppm

2. The Agency proposes that the following minimum buffer zones (the downwind distance between the ventilation release location and any non-occupational bystander) be observed when ventilation occurs:

Situation – Buffer zone
Ship‘s hold (greater than 1000 kg methyl bromide used) – 100m
Ship‘s hold (less than 1000 kg) – 50m
Logs/timber under covers outdoors and indoors (without recapture technology) – 50m
Shipping containers – 25m

Note 1: Non-occupational bystanders include not just those persons living in nearby residential properties but also those who may be temporarily present in a location, for example, walking on footpaths.

(3) European Union
B1.2.1 At its meeting on March 25, 2009, the European Parliament banned the use of methyl bromide within the European Union (EU) from March 18, 2010. This ban is significantly sooner than the 2015 phase-out originally proposed by the European Commission and supported by EU governments.

B1.2.2 The ban covers the use of methyl bromide as a pesticide, as well as its use for QPS purposes prior to transport. This ban includes the gassing of containers to control vermin. The only remaining exceptions to the ban will be the use of methyl bromide for analytical use in laboratories and for its use in emergencies, such as where a large-scale epidemic occurs (methyl bromide used for emergencies may be used for a period not exceeding 120 days and up to a quantity not exceeding 20 metric tonnes).

B1.2.3 The calculated level of methyl bromide which may be used in the period from 1 January 2010 to 18 March 2010 in the EU is not to exceed 45 (ODP) tonnes. Until 18 March 2010 methyl bromide may be placed on the market and used for QPS purposes for treatment of goods for export, under the condition that at least 80 % of methyl bromide released from the consignment is recovered.

ERMA GE Decision Smells of US and Political Influence

The main benefactor of the Environmental Risk Management Authority’s (ERMA) decision to allow the application by Crown Research Institute AgResearch a carte blanche application to genetically engineer (GE) cattle, sheep, and goats using a huge range of E.coli bacteria, human, mouse, sheep, goats, cattle, and viruses, and other material is the United States biotech company GTC Biotherapeutics (GTC), an offshoot of Genzyme Corporation, according to the Soil & Health Association.

“There has been panic on the part of AgResearch and its partner Genzyme ever since the earlier applications by AgResearch for GE animals were halted in June 2009 by the High Court through action taken by GE Free NZ,” said Soil & Health Association of NZ Spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“AgResearch should not have been presumptive in its contractual arrangements with GTC, but appeared to have had the indication from ERMA that they would get the earlier application approved. ERMA has been bending over backwards ever since to ensure AgResearch could meet its US partner’s needs. Even the US Secretary of State’s science and technology advisor Nina Federoff came calling on the government in late January.”(1)

“While ERMA  says the approval is purely for research,(2) AgResearch acknowledge it allows them to meet their contractual obligations (3), and GTC is very clear that AgResearch is to “establish appropriate transgenic founder production lines” (4), this is totally commercial and the New Zealand public are funding it to the tune of at least $8million with science funding(5). GTC’s contribution is only $200,000 but holds the US patents to any transgenic therapeutic mammalian milk proteins. (4)”

“The Chief Executive of ERMA ensuring GTC’s interests would be met, promptly ticked through AgResearch applications for indoor GE goats in December 2009 without public consultation even though ERMA acknowledged existing high public interest.”

“Highly conflicted Dr. Kieran Elborough, as chair of ERMA’s GM Standing Committee, and who had been involved with AgResearch through his own GE work in the past, renewed the consent duration of AgResearch’s existing GE cattle on 11 March 2010 for another 2.5 years. And on 1-2 March as chair of the ERMA Decision Making Committee heard the submissions about the GE sheep, cattle and goats. Soil & Health, on March 3, had again publicly exposed the Chair’s conflict of interest but on 8 March he met with the Committee on the decision-making task. On March 26 Dr. Elborough joined the board of a combined CRIs joint venture, and finally acknowledged a perceived conflict of interest and stood down on 29 March, leaving just one more meeting for the remaining 3 decision-makers.”

GTC is highly reliant on AgResearch and has been under serious financial pressure following product development failures, contaminated medicines, and penalty costs. In its annual report GTC acknowledges its survival relies on its partners and equity programs.

Excerpts from Genzyme’s financial statements September 2009 (7)

“We also have a development agreement in place with AgResearch in New Zealand for co-funding further development of selected follow-on biologics, particularly where European patents expire prior to U.S. patents…

…We have operated at a net loss since our inception in 1993, and we used $20.3 million of net cash in our operating cash flows during the first nine months of 2009. Our recurring losses from operations and our limited funds raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. We are entirely dependent upon funding from equity financings, partnering programs and proceeds from short and long-term debt to finance our operations until we achieve commercial success in selling and licensing our products and positive cash flow from operations.”

Not only  is the New Zealand taxpayer spending precious taxpayers science funding money on GTC, it is at risk of being implicated in liability actions down the line as GTC’s parent Genzyme has a poor safety record in its medicines manufacture,” said Mr Browning.

“Viruses and inert contaminants have led to massive international alerts and the most recent events had the US Food and Drug Agency (FDA) on 26 March moving into a major Genzyme plant to enforce manufacturing practice regulations.”

From Genzyme’s own media release that day, “The FDA enforcement action will likely result in a consent decree, under which a third party would inspect and review the plant’s operation for an extended period and certify compliance with FDA regulations. Under a consent decree, Genzyme also would be required to make payments to the government and could incur other costs.”(8)

“Once again our taxpayer owned Foundation for Research Science and Technology (FoRST) is dishing out precious research money to big US corporates trading in risky dangerous activity. Another one that has gloated about NZ taxpayers money on its annual statement is Arborgen who want to be the Monsanto of GE trees internationally and are partnered with CRI Scion. Scion also benefitted from Dr Elborough signing off without public consultation another 8 years for a previously discontinued GE pine tree field trial in full knowledge of the history of non-compliance there.”

“New Zealand government agencies are tripping over themselves to get into bed with large US corporations, and run roughshod over the New Zealand public to avoid due process and corruptly give blanket approvals to their friends GE experiments.”

“It is no wonder with such disregard for fair process, precaution and law by the agencies, that protestors consider direct action.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 without risky GE or influence by US corporates over New Zealand’s science and decision making processes.

NOTES

Links accessed April 2010

(1)   http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/science+meeting+highlights+strong+tie…

(2)   http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/news-events/archives/media-releases/2010/mr-20…

(3)   http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/SC1004/S00040.htm

(4)   http://www.allbusiness.com/science-technology/experimentation-research/1…

(5)   The decision http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/find/WebResultsDetails.aspx?ID=1103

(6)   http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/contracts-law-licensing-agreements/1138…

(7)   http://google.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=687…

(8)   http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/genzyme/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news…

Bethells Herbicides and Taranakis 1080 A National Issue

The community concern over aerial spraying at Te Henga, near Bethells Beach, followed by a 1080 debacle in Taranaki is indicative of a much wider issue; the extra heavy use of chemicals throughout New Zealand and the lack of vision for a pesticide free environment, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ. Soil & Health is calling for a national ban on aerial spraying to match that of Europe.
“New Zealand is a poisoners paradise with little restriction against broad scale herbicide spraying on agricultural, forestry, amenity and conservation land, or of pelletised animal poisons being aerial dropped over huge areas,” said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.
A public meeting was held last week at Waitakere Primary School to discuss aerial herbicide spraying in the Bethells area. Concerns over potential environmental and human health risks from an intended 23 hectare wetland area of willow being herbicide sprayed by local councils near Bethells beach, had prompted a legal appeal and postponement of the operation. However regardless of that outcome, a neighbouring landowner aerial sprayed vegetation immediately adjacent as a permitted activity, although conditions and notification were unsuitable.
“Bethells is a microcosm of a conflict building in New Zealand in which communities are tiring of pesticides being applied with little regard for their health and with little effective consultation. Spray drift rules in council plans throughout New Zealand are ineffective and there exists a presumption of right to spray among land managers, whether foresters, conservationists, or farmers,” said Mr Browning.
“The Egmont National Park aerial drop of 1080 poison, which also landed on some personnel busy weed spraying, shows that Bethells is just one victim of a country wide conservation regime that is fixated with a chemical killing approach to protecting indigenous biodiversity.”
“At the Bethells Te Henga wetland as in many throughout New Zealand, indigenous conservation is the excuse for widespread spraying of introduced plants such as willows. The native plant conservators ignore the subtleties of toxics on the very ecosystem they strive to preserve, and the neighbouring farmer like so many others seem to think it OK to herbicide drench the very land his customers food comes from.”
“Environment Waikato at the same time is preparing to allow blanket 10 year region-wide non publicly notified consents to dump 1080 into water and onto land. This council knows about available alternatives to 1080, but like most other councils is taking the easy way out despite the wishes of many in its own community.”
“ New Zealand needs vision not poison.”
“Soil & Health is calling for a ban on aerial spraying to match Europe’s, where history has shown that broad brush chemical pest management approaches are in fact not a sustainable solution but cause human and environmental harm.”
“At a time when aerial spraying of chemicals is now banned in Europe, the so called Department of Conservation and its cohorts the Councils throughout New Zealand are spraying on like there is no tomorrow,” said Mr Browning.
“Will they pay as each of their current poisons is shown to cause unacceptable harm? Will they pay as tourists and discerning markets turn off?”
Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 in which aerial spraying of toxins has no place, and flora and fauna, farmers and the community thrive in a vibrant live environment.