GE Plants And Animals Do Not Belong In Clean Green 100% Pure NZ

/in , ,

With a continued effort towards genetically engineering New Zealand pasture plants and developing herds of genetically engineered (GE) animals, AgResearch appears to miss the meaning of clean green 100% Pure, according to the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand.
“AgResearch in developing GE ryegrass and GE clover as a means of altering farming’s greenhouse gas emissions, misses the point that the aware consumers who value clean and green and are concerned at greenhouse emissions, are also aghast at genetic engineering,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.
“The Prime Minister and his ministers also tout clean and green 100% Pure because they understand its value in commercial terms, however there is a disconnect with the reality, that real sustainability does not include GE.”
“AgResearch and government cannot have it both ways.”
“Whose anti-clean green, anti-100% Pure policy is AgResearch following? The vested interests of PGG-Wrightson Seeds, multi-national GE drug entrepreneurs, AgResearch GE science careers, or is it the government’s hidden intention to follow a GE future for New Zealand’s pasture and products?”
“GE rye, clover and animals cannot co-exist with a clean green New Zealand.”
AgResearch on TV3 news last night discussed development of a clover that when eaten and digested will produce less methane than current varieties. Using intragenics, the clover is to be bred from genetically engineered clover, and AgResearch is hoping that along with its GE ryegrass development, using ryegrass genes, that somehow the technology will be acceptable, because it is not the unusual combinations such as toad genes into potatoes or Arctic cod into strawberries.
Not so says Soil & Health, “Both intragenics and cisgenics are GE and carry the same type of risks as the more exotic sounding GE examples.”
“And for every theoretical GE advance, there is a clean and sustainable organic alternative that stands to serve New Zealand’s best value export markets in a way that AgResearch’s gimmicks cannot.”
“Conventional breeding and use of more diverse pastures, farm forestry, and reduced intensification can all lead to better value and preferred consumer products, better animal welfare benefits and better sustainable outcomes than AgResearch’s drive for unnatural and narrow focused production,” said Mr Browning.
“Clean green organic dairy farming cuts nitrate leaching into waterways by 58% and soils have 43% more earthworms. 28% more carbon is stored in organically farmed soils, so why not support organics growth into the growing US$50 billion international organics market.”
Soil & Health – Organic NZ will be present at the National Agricultural Fieldays at Mystery Creek this week at stall PE20, and is determined that GE be removed from New Zealand’s agricultural scene.
“A vision for best value New Zealand products and tourism doesn’t include commodity agriculture polluted by genetic engineering.”
“The gloves must come off against the Crown Research Institutes (CRI) continued GE attack on the New Zealand environment, both by AgResearch with its bizarre and cruel GE animal experiments, its intended GE polluting of pastures, and also Scion with its GE trees. Plant & Food Research also needs to make up its mind, if it intends to continue considering GE field trials and divert its energy’s from extensive GE laboratory experiments into technologies for best practice organics and genuine clean green 100% Pure sustainable production.”

New Zealand Exporters Cheating India

/in ,

Methyl bromide fumigation of logs for India at Picton this weekend is not expected to meet phytosanitary requirements due to cold temperatures and so unnecessarily risks the health of the community and environment, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.
The log ship Maipo River is due into Port Marlborough’s Shakepeare Bay port on June 14 to pick up logs pre-fumigated during this coming weekend. The log destination country, India’s phyto-sanitary requirements against New Zealand insect pests, stipulates that logs must be fumigated for 24 hours at more than 10°C. (1,2,3)
“With an expected overnight low in nearby Blenheim of 3°C on Saturday night and a high of only 11°C on Sunday with a minimum of just 1°C, fumigation in Picton will be a dangerous farce,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.(4)
“Someone is cooking the books.”
“The importing country’s fumigation requirements will not be met and yet tons of neurotoxic ozone depleting methyl bromide gas will be released from under log stack tarpaulins, into the environment and ferry shipping channels. A fruitless exercise.”
“Building fumigation and gas recovery sheds at New Zealand ports could allow both temperature control and recapture of methyl bromide, reducing risk to the community and damage to the ozone layer, yet greed by exporters, fumigators and port companies allows cheating and unsafe practices to continue.”
“As the cool weather has descended, Port Marlborough’s live website weather portal has stopped running correctly and historical data stops at May 13, ensuring no temperature details for the most recent fumigation exist.”(5,6)
Soil & Health has monitored weather conditions during Picton fumigations through the Port Marlborough website until now and recently showed images from the site to the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA), during its hearings for the reassessment of methyl bromide use in New Zealand. The decision is pending.
Removing community access to real-time data reduces independent monitoring of log fumigations which have a history of conflicts of interest. Soil & Health and local campaigners, Guardians of the Sounds, have pointed out the use of fumigation staff by monitoring agencies, and the ownership of the port companies by local and regional councils who resist strict air safety rules while collecting log shipment revenues.
“Soil & Health’s submission to ERMA included a request to implement methyl bromide gas recapture and the use of alternative non-toxic methods of pest control. With methyl bromide having no colour or stench and no authoritive understanding of gas drift direction, the toxic gas could be affecting numerous people following its release to air, and will eventually damage the ozone layer affecting climate change,” said Mr Browning.
“Fumigation company Genera may be fudging data to meet India’s import requirements and with the company fumigating below temperature specifications last year also, there should be urgent temperature monitoring at all New Zealand fumigation facilities to ensure that Genera is not exposing New Zealanders, the environment and ozone layer to methyl bromide for no real purpose.”
Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 where pest control is achieved with less toxic controls and the health of the community is given priority above the financial gains of exporters, fumigators and commercially driven port companies.

NOTES:
(1) http://www..portmarlborough.co.nz/Shipping%20Schedules
(2) http://www.portmarlborough.co.nz/Home
Notice of Methyl Bromide Fumigation at Shakespeare Bay
9 June, 2010
Venting of deck cargo for the MV Maipo River is expected to occur on 13th June. Fumigation operations are required to comply with the port company’s requirements that enforce a maximum permissible discharge to air at the port boundary of one part per million (1ppm) as measured and managed by independent monitoring.
(3) India – Logs to India require fumigation with MB at:
· 48gm/m3 at>21°Cfor24hours.
· 56 gm/m3 at 16-20°C for 24 hours.
· 64gm/m3 at 11-15°C for 24 hours.
· 72 gm/m3 at 10-11 °C for 24 hours.
· China will allow less than 10°C but at the 5-15°C temperature range requires significantly more (120gm/m3 methyl bromide to be used for at least 16hrs.

(4) http://www.metservice.com/towns-cities/blenheim
(5) http://www.portmarlborough.co.nz/Live%20Weather
(6) http://www.portmarlborough.co.nz/Weather%20History

Caged Poultry Farmer’s Imprisonment Justifies Animal Liberators Efforts

/in , , ,

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

/in , ,

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

/in ,

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

/in , , ,

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

/in , ,

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

/in ,

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

/in , ,

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.
https://www.pan-europe.info/old/Campaigns/pesticides/documents/cum_syn_effects/Kortenkamp%20state%20of%20the%20art%20mixture%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.

Protest Against Methyl Bromide Gas Release

/in , ,

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.