Petition Comments
# 29,162:
June 18, Shelly Vasquez, California
I find this spraying method to be a violation of my Human Rights. Sounds extreme, however, so does dumping potentially toxic chemicals over a heavily populated area without the consent of its inhabitants. I have an 18 month old daughter and am apalled that anyone with a child would okay such spraying. Please make this stop.
# 29,134:
June 17, Maria Shoykhet, California
I am absolutely against the spray. It would be an awful tragedy! In the bay area, where we are so health conscious, where organic food is readily available, it is a huge injustice to undo all efforts to live a healthy life by spraying us! I do not want to be sprayed.
# 28,228:
June 5, Susan Garbert, California
Spraying pests overhead is irresponsible . If this is how our agricultural system operates, then we are all done for . An agri-"chemical" future will only kill us slowly and insects will continue on. We need more intelligent and integrated approaches to growing food and less stranglehold from petroleum based chemical corporations.
# 28,180:
June 4, Sydney Fisher Bernier, California
Our basic human rights are being violated. Spraying the LBAM is immoral. You are putting our children and our elderly at needless risk. The money to be made from this operation will come at a nightmarish cost to our health and safety. Please stop the insanity.
# 27,964:
June 1, Sharon Meyer, California
As a clinical nutrition therapist, I see the impact of environmental toxins and its relationship to disease. And how dare this be done without our knowledge or consent.
# 27,619:
May 27, Paula Tusler, California
I hold a QAC pest control license. I have had this for over 10 years. Also have degree in horticulture from UC Davis. Have lots of classes about the science of pest control. This approach is not scientific, and potentially very harmful to wildlife and people.
# 25365:
April 27, Jacqueline Shockley, California
My 3 year old daughter ended up with a rash all over her body after the spray. It started out as red blochy patches on her hands and legs. It took a few months for it to go away. My 5 year old daughter complained of severe sotmache and headaches for three to four days following the November spray. Is there somewhere I can report these incidents?
# 25369:
Apr 28, 2008, Teresa Goldberg, California
Myself and my daughter got a very unusual sinus problem after the last sprays around Santa Cruz. We were quite ill for at least a week.
# 25483:
April 29, 2008, Brent Carvalho, California
We want answers! We want Democracy! The major health concern is the number of people who will fall ill after these sprayings. Do your research, test these chemicals and then present it to the voters. Let the voters decide. Clearly this is meant to serve a special interest, not the interest of our health.
# 25491:
Apr 29, 2008, Andrea Ayres, Oregon
I have been a pesticide applicator and work in the industry, but people need to have a free choice about their exposure to chemicals.
# 25,062:
Apr 24, Nathan Lawrence , California
The intended spraying here this June threatens millions of hatchling birds. Nathan Lawrence, board member NAR Native Animal Rescue
# 18,524:
Apr 12, 2008, Danielle Bronstein , California
I feel violated, silenced, and put at risk by my own state government in this matter. This is not how our democracy is meant to operate, and refusal to listen to the people of California will only result in further alienation and resentment toward the people in office.
# 13,662:
Mar 20, 2008, Anonymous , California
Imagine yourself as a person battling cancer. Now imagine adding air-borne toxic pesticides to the burden your body is bearing. Where will you go? What will you do?....That's me. Please help. Don't spray.
# 13,122:
Mar 16, 2008, Diana Strong , California
What we need is sustainable agriculture- the public should never be subjected to something like mass spraying, and it won't solve any problems. If even ONE person is injured from spraying, it is not worth the saved apples.
# 12,906:
Mar 13, 2008, Lynn Elliott-Harding , California
My 16 year old son said to me last night, "How can we call this a democracy, if the government can spray toxic chemicals over our heads?" I am committed to showing him how democracy can work, as we stop the spray. My son has asthma.
# 12,298:
Mar 8, 2008, Nancy Alvarez , California
As a home owner, I am extremely concerned about the health and welfare of my neighbors. After the last sprayings, many became ill with symptoms characteristic of side effects connected with the chemicals used. As a native Californian and a registered Republican, I am angry with recent developments in our state government that clearly put our citizens lives and the economics of this beautiful state in harm's way!
# 8375:
Feb 22, 2008, Diana Moll, California
Having already been sprayed once I am vehemently against this action. The invasive and stressful experience of planes flying repeatedly over one's home for hours is enough to make a person scream and cry "Make it stop!" Add to that the unknown long term, and even unknown short term environmental and health effects, plus the apparently insane statements of the CDFA and FDA, this is hands down a loser of an idea.
# 7,810:
Feb 20, 2008, Cynthia Li , California
As a doctor at San Francisco General who has been involved in environmental health issues over the last few years, I understand the health problems that pesticides pose to humans. Pregnant women (and their fetuses) and children are the most vulnerable. Please do not spray in our city, or others, with pesticides.
# 6,925:
Feb 19, 2008, Kye Peven , California
I cannot believe that the State of California, one of the most progressive and environmentally conscientious states in the nation, would authorize this ridiculous procedure that will endanger the health of the human population without evidence that it will have any effect on the moth population, besides the numerous other harmful effects the chemicals will have on our water, our air, and other beneficial species. Our government is supposed to serve the people's interest and protect the public, not bow to special interests and poison the people and environment of California.
# 6164:
Feb 19, 2008, Anonymous, California
Here it is the 19th of February. Since the November Spraying here in Santa Cruz, my calendar shows 68 entries of headaches, migraines,upset stomach, nauseau, flu-like symptoms and 4 doctor visits so far this year.And one trip to the vet with a sick cat "maybe something she ate outside?". Never in my 74 years have I had a Winter with So Many Sick Days. Wonder just how many Sick Days--thousands of Sick Days were caused by the aerial spraying? Have not seen any investigative reports on that aspect. There is a Clear and Present Danger--State Officials are you unwilling to Ask And Tell or do we wait 20-30-50 years for the Whole Story?
# 5611:
Feb 18, 2008, Neil Tangri, California
It is outrageous that the government feels that it can introduce chemicals into our air and our homes without our consent. Nor is there any justification for this spraying: invasive species are a fact of life; and aerial spraying has never eliminated a single one. Spraying may indeed reduce their numbers and therefore the crop damage; but how many human lives is that worth? And who decides how much crop damage your life is worth?
# 5581:
Feb 18, 2008, Dorinda Himes, California
As an environmental scientist for over 24 years, I understand that mass spraying is inappropriate and may harm humans and other species not targeted during the spray. The inert ingredients in many of these sprays constitute untested toxic petrolum-based products. Lets use precaution and allow communities to decide whats best for them, not government.
# 402:
Oct 26, 2007, Anonymous, California
Growers have forgotten how to farm. Everything has to be sprayed. Agriculture is getting cheap labor, paying no health care costs for laborers and individuals drifted upon, and getting subsidies. Agricultural practices are leaving us with unhealthy air, water and food. We need to be cleaning up the mess and not adding more chemicals to our precious environment.
# 212:
Oct 22, 2007, Tim Wilcox, California
My child nearly died from the first round of spraying. He now has asthma from exposure to this chemical coctail. As a proud member of our armed forces, I can honestly say that this is not what I fight for...I do not fight for the right of special interests to poison my family. This is CRIMINAL and needs to be stopped.
# 25:
Oct 8, 2007, Shannon Carnazzo, California
I felt very mis informed this past spraying. Information was given about the chemical make up that was later retracted, no one knew when they were being sprayed and really the TRUE precations they should take. I called the information line to become more informed, and during hours of operation thay did not answer the phone. When I did finally speak to a representitive I was told differnnt information than was on the newsletter. I have friends who have had difficulty sleeping since the spraying. I know for a fact I could not sleep the week during the spraying. I also had a sore throat and difficulty breathing for days after the spraying. I've heard many people complain of similar symptoms.
# 14:
Oct 4, 2007, Giulietta Garland, California
I experienced headaches and got sick with a respiratory illness shortly after the spraying (and I rarely get sick!). The spraying is unnecessary and an assault on our rights as citizens. Other agents have been considered 'safe" and proven dangerous later. Prove to me this is safe before exposing us against our will.
# 7:
Oct 4, 2007, Anne Parker Johnson, California
We live in a democracy. We have the right to be part of the decision whether to spray or not. Make our voices heard!
|
LBAM AERIAL SPRAY OVER URBAN AREAS STOPPED
June 19, 2008
Reactions
John Russo, founder StopTheSpray.ORG: “The research, websites, community outreach, lawsuits, and lobbying done by thousands of ordinary citizens from Pacific Grove to Sonoma created the pressure that made this possible. This is an extraodinary example how people can come together, get involved, and make a difference. A significant threat to ourselves and our environment has been eliminated." California Progress Report (6/20/08)
Lisa Chipkin, Coordinator for Stop the Spray Marin: "We have the CDFA to thank for spurring a larger conversation across all walks of life about the reckless use of pesticides and the toll they are taking on our health and our environment. These practices are unsustainable and it is time for us to call for big changes in the way we approach commercial agriculture and view ‘invasive species,’ " Press release Stop The Spray Marin
Tom Kelly, spokesperson Stop the Spray East Bay: "We insist on greater disclosure, a right to know what we are being exposed to, and that government take a precautionary approach should similar situations occur in the future. A pesticide reform movement has been awakened in California and will continue to grow." Press release Stop The Spray Marin
Judi Shils, Director, Search for the Cause: "The silver lining in all of this is that a movement has been born. Not just about stopping the spray, but about working to eradicate toxic chemicals from every aspect of our lives. We are reminded that when people unite to protect the health and well being of their families and communities, they are unstoppable." Press release Stop The Spray Marin
Debbie Friedman, co-founder of Mothers of Marin Against the Spray: "We are encouraged by the announcement, but it does not go far enough. We are still concerned about the ingredients used in the ground-based applications. Overall, the entire program is flawed." Marin Independent Journal (6/19/08)
Paul Schramski, State Director Pesticide Watch: “Californians should not be exposed to toxic pesticides--whether it’s drift from aerial spraying over rural areas or insecticide goo on telephone poles. Yesterday’s announcement by CDFA Secretary A.G. Kawamura may not go far enough to reduce unnecessary chemical exposures to people and the environment, say environmental and health groups. This development gives us additional time to determine if any intervention at all is warranted. The necessity of the state’s LBAM eradication program remains questionable, promoting the use of pesticides without scientific evidence that the moth poses any threat to agriculture or the environment.” California Progress Report (6/20/08)
Nan Wishner, chair, city of Albany Integrated Pest Management Task Force: "This is a huge victory for every mom, every M.D., every congressperson who spoke out against the unconscionable use of chemicals on a population." San Francisco Chronicle (6/20/08)
Mike Lynberg, Pacific Grove resident who collected illness complaints after aerial spraying in 2007: "I'm relieved that they're stopping the aerial spraying. But I don't think they have done it out of concern for public health and public safety. I think they have done it because their hand was forced and because there was such political, legal and public opposition." Monterey Herald (6/20/08)
Assemblymember Mark Leno (D-San Francisco): “This is welcome news and a great relief to people across the Bay Area. This wise decision is the result of months of grassroots public outcry from active and concerned people across the Bay Area and along the coasts who knew there was a better way. I applaud the administration for its actions today and will continue to monitor any developments, especially any spraying in ‘highly forested areas.’ This is a great example of how average citizens can come together, have their collective voices heard and affect statewide policy. I commend everyone who said ‘no way’ to the spray.” California Progress Report (6/20/08)
Assemblymember Sandré R. Swanson (D-Oakland): “Fortunately, the tremendous protest against the proposed spraying in the Bay Area demonstrates that people can still effectively petition their government. That is a sign of a healthy democracy. That said, this will not be the last time that a non-native insect will enter California. Time will tell if the State can come up with transparent procedures to handle menacing pests in a way that won’t endanger the public’s health.” California Progress Report (6/20/08)
Assemblymember Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael): “I believe the prospect of aerial spray in residential areas is now off the table. Of course, the devil is in the details, and we will be watchful of those details, especially the notion of continued spraying in 'forested areas'. I will continue to advance my measure, AB 2765, to ensure public process and full disclosure in situations like this." California Progress Report (6/20/08)
Senator Carole Migden (D-San Francisco): “I’m gratified that the Governor listened to my concerns and the outrage of our citizens and has abandoned his ill-conceived plan to spray an untested pesticide over our cities.”
Assemblymember John Laird (D-Santa Cruz): “Following a briefing I received in the governor’s office, I’m pleased with the CDFA’s decision to discontinue aerial spraying over urban areas for LBAM. Today’s news represents significant progress and evidence that the governor is responding to public concerns." Salinas Californian (6/19/08)
Oakland City Attorney John Russo: “This is a victory for all Californians who believe that our government should not gamble with public health and the well being of our environment. After the court decisions in Santa Cruz and Monterey, the state’s plan to spray an untested chemical over our homes, businesses and schools without a proper environmental review was all but over. Credit is due to Secretary Kawamura for putting a stop to a poorly conceived program before Oakland and our neighbors had to go to court to do it for him.” California Progress Report (6/20/08)
OPPOSITION TO AERIAL SPRAY
It's not right
Sandré Swanson, Assemblymember Oakland: "This process has no credibility. The people have to be at the table, don't silence their voices!" Stop The Spray Rally, Sacramento (4/15/08)
Caroline Cox, Center for Environmental Health: "In 20 years of working to change pesticide policies in favor of health and safety, some issues come up again and again. One of them marks the intersection between Democracy and science: Should we be exposed to chemicals when we don't know what they are and we have not given our consent?" Stop The Spray East Bay town hall meeting (6/23/08)
Dr. Elisa Song, pediatrician: "Children have no voice, and rely on their parents and the wisdom of elected officials to be that voice for them. It is only just that parents be given the right to be fully informed and decide if the benefits of spraying outweigh the risks to their children." Testimony CA Assembly Agriculture Committee hearing (4/16/08)
Carole Migden, San Francisco Senator: "We don't believe we've adequately registered the depth of the public apprehension and opposition. Why would we want to be part of a public experiment?" Marin Independent Journal (4/12/08)
Dave Cavanaugh, Director Ornamental Horticulture Santa Cruz County Farm Bureau: “I just hate to see agriculture being pitted against the community. It’s wrong, and anybody would try to avoid that like the plague.” Pajaronian (3/24/08)
Joe Nation, candidate for the CA State Senate: "This is the beginning of the end of pesticide use in California." Marin Independent Journal (5/10/08)
Dr. Megan Schwarzman, UC Berkeley School of Public Health: “I think it’s really essential that we know more about the chronic effects. My level of concern is with the substances that are the inert ingredients and how those may effect people over long-term exposure. Inert does not mean harmless.” CBS 5 (5/1/08)
Dr. Lawrence Rose MD, MPH, retired senior Public Medical Officer for Cal-OSHA: " Physicians are legally required to report diagnosed pesticide diagnosis; but in the two sprayed counties there was no systematic notification that included probable short term health reactions sent to health providers, first responders, emergency rooms, or all residents before the September, October, and November 2007 sprayings. This is a shocking disregard of human rights in any democracy." Testimony before California State Assembly
USDA internal email: Spraying chemicals from the air and using them for eradication are “largely untested strategies” Santa Cruz Superior Court (4/24/08)
Mike Lynberg, Author of Report on 643 Illnesses: "It's against the law to spray pesticides on fields when farm workers are present, as CDFA Secretary A.G. Kawamura said at an Alameda City Council meeting in early April. Yet, somehow, it is not against the law to spray the same pesticides on millions of people, including children, the elderly and people with chronic disease. San Francisco Chronicle Guest Commentary (4/16/08)
Dr. Joel Parrot, Executive Director Oakland Zoo: "No one knows, and no one can tell you if it's safe. That's really the bottom line." San Francisco Commission on Animals and Wildlife (5/8/08)
Jared Blumenthal, Director San Francisco Department of the Environment: "The state is saying they want to eradicate the moth. We don't think that is possible." San Francisco Chronicle (4/15/08)
USDA internal email:Checkmate "is being applied in a way that we believe may seriously compromise its effectiveness, which may have been problematic to start with.”Santa Cruz Superior Court (4/24/08)
Professor James Carey, entomologist, UC Davis: "Never in the history of insect eradication has a pheromone ever been used for any eradication program, much less been successful in eradicating any insect population." Testimony before California Sate Assembly (3/12/08)
Dr. Derrell Chambers, PhD, retired USDA expert on pheromone-pesticides: “Certainly, the public’s present feeling that they are being subjected to an unwarranted, unsafe, and untested procedure should be more thoroughly addressed than it so far has been. I believe the LBAM project should be challenged on all these issues, but I am particularly concerned that the issue of efficacy has not been sufficiently questioned.” Testimony before CA Senate Environmental Quality Committee (4/28/08)
Richard Fagerlund, entymologist: "We probably will never eradicate the moth, but we can potentially cause great harm to many Californians and the environment by repeatedly spraying chemicals all over our communities. San Francisco Chronicle (2/23/08)
John Laird, California State Assemblymember: “It is the responsibility of our government to demonstrate its LBAM actions are necessary and do not compromise human or environmental health. It isn’t the responsibility of the people to demonstrate the reverse.” Press Release, (3/13/08)
Chris Pavlos, Manager Soquel Nursery Growers: "We're just not seeing the kind of damages to plants they keep talking about." AP (4/11/08)
USDA internal email: LBAM is a “transient pest”. Santa Cruz Superior Court (4/24/08)
Richard Fagerlund: LBAM can’t be that devastating to thousands of species of plants, otherwise “both Australia and New Zealand would be very barren countries, plantwise, and that isn't the case.” San Francisco Chronicle (2/23/08)
Daniel Harder, Ph.D. Executive Director the Arboretum, University of California at Santa Cruz, and Jeff Rosendale, Grower, Horticultural Consultant, Watsonville CA: "The Light Brown Apple Moth (LBAM) has been an established exotic species in New Zealand for more than 100 years. Today, LBAM is effectively controlled almost exclusively by natural predators in both agricultural settings and wild lands in New Zealand. There is no evidence of biological or environmental threat from LBAM in New Zealand." Integrated Pest Management Practices for the Light Brown Apple Moth in New Zealand: Implications for California (3/6/08)
Miguel Altieri, UC Berkeley associate professor of Agroecology: “The fact that the moth is here doesn't mean devastation." San Francisco Chronicle
Mike Butcher, entomologist, technical manager New Zealand Pip Fruit Industry: "It's not a major problem. We just have to keep fruit clean of it if we want to export them to the U.S." Santa Cruz Sentinel (3/13/08)
Steve Bontadelli, President Santa Cruz County Farm Bureau: "I'm not afraid it's [the moth] going to damage my crop, I'm afraid I won't be able to sell my crop." Santa Cruz Sentinel (3/13/08)
Dave Cavanaugh, Director Ornamental Horticulture Santa Cruz County Farm Bureau: "So the basic question is: Are we overreacting to exotic pests on pure speculation?" Metro Santa Cruz (3/12/08)
Dr. Marshall Johnson, entomologist UC-Riverside, Technical Working Group (TWG): "The driving factor is the possibility of other countries shutting off our exports to them."
Reactions to Court Rules and Governor Orders:
Spraying Delayed, 4/24/08
Tony Madrigal, Santa Cruz City Council Member: "The court ruling to stop the spray temporarily represents a victory for the health of all people in our communities. This struggle is far from over and our communities will continue to unite more and more until the State puts the health of the people first. This is our air, these are our lungs, and it should be our decision whether or not we get sprayed."
John Russo, Founder StopTheSpray.ORG: "The court decision in Santa Cruz validates what has been said from the start: our rights have been stolen with a false emergency. It's our body, and it is our decision what goes into it."
David Dilworth, Founder HOPE (Help Our Peninsula Environment): “When this started we knew it was morally wrong and legally wrong. The courts have just confirmed it is legally wrong.”
Robert Lieber, Mayor City of Albany: "Waiting for the completion of an EIR and additional toxicity test is the right thing to do. Sadly, I have no confidence that the CDFA has any intention of stopping their misguided LBAM eradication plan. LBAM continues to be misrepresented by Big Ag and CDFA as a devastating pest. The only harm it has ever done is through US imposed quarantines No crop damage. LBAM has been here for decades! We must work for reclassification of LBAM and it's removal from USDA's list of invasive species."
Nan Wishner, Chair City of Albany Integrated Pest Management Task Force : "The Judge's ruling in the Santa Cruz v. CDFA case that there is no evidence of harm to California ecosystems from the light brown apple moth and therefore no emergency that justifies aerial spraying without environmental review affirms that the apple moth eradication program has not been based on sound science and facts about the biology and behavior of the moth."
Bill Monning, Attorney and Candidate for the 27th Assembly District: "These decisions are a tribute to the organizing efforts of those concerned about public health and environmental safety and afford some time for the further collection of critical data. It is important to note, however, that neither of these decisions represent a final determination on the status of future aerial spraying. We must therefore remain vigilant in the monitoring of these decisions and carefully analyze the information produced."
Mike De Lay, coordinator of A Coalition of California Cities to Stop the Spray: "I am greatful that the Governor gave us a stay of execution from the aerial spraying. We now have additional time to inform and involve more cities and request they pass resolutions in opposition to the spray. Since the State government says We the People do not have a vote and ignore the voice of the 1,815,434 Californians represented by their elected officials, let's see what happens when we double these numbers."
|
