Two state agencies and the U.S.
Geological Survey are teaming up to test for pesticides in surface
water and sediment throughout Hawaii.
Approximately
24 stream locations representing four different land uses will be
sampled statewide. Eight of the sites are on Kauai. Another eight
sites are on Oahu, six are on the Big Island and two are on Maui.
According
to a fact sheet from the state Department of Health, which is leading
the “snapshot” study in partnership with the Department of
Agriculture and USGS:
The
State of Hawaii has no ongoing stream monitoring program for
pesticides and consequently there is very little information
available to evaluate whether current pesticide use practices are
resulting in off-site movement of pesticides into state waters. The
data from this pilot study will provide preliminary information on
the presence or absence of pesticide residue levels in surface
waters. The
results will be compared to water quality standards, environmental
action levels and other state and federal guidelines, to provide a
mechanism to rate risks of differing compounds detected.
The
samples are being collected from locations that are most likely to
reflect pesticide usage and impacts, including monoculture crops
(seed corn, sugar, mac nuts, coffee); mixed use ag (taro, veggies,
papaya, banana, ornamentals); golf courses and resorts that use
pesticides for landscaping; and mixed urban and residential.
The
sampling will focus on perennial streams adjacent to or downstream
from the pesticide usage areas. In areas without perennial streams,
anchialine pools, wetlands and lagoons that have storm overflow to
the ocean and agricultural drainage systems will be tested.
DOH
personnel have collected nearly all the samples of surface water and
sediment, and USGS labs on the mainland will test them for more than
100 different pesticides. Water and sediment from up to six sites
will be tested for glyphosate (Roundup) “due
to community concern about use and fate of this herbicide,” the
fact sheet states. Testing is expected to take two to three months.
The
Garden Island touched on this statewide sampling in Sunday's article on the atrazine study, which I reported way back on Dec. 26.
Unfortunately, though TGI has been quick to report allegations of
pesticide-related illnesses, the reporter failed to include some
crucial data from the atrazine report.
Though
293 pesticide complaints were made statewide between
2010 and 2013 — just 42 were from Kauai — “less
than half are due to agricultural activities.” Yet Bill
2491/Ordinance 960 targeted only ag activities for pesticide
disclosure and buffer zones.
TGI
also failed to report that the atrazine study included a summary of
calls to the Hawaii Poison Center:
Of
the 4,800 human pesticide exposure calls, approximately 90% of the
exposures occurred in a residence, 4.4% in the workplace and 1% in a
school. The remaining 4% consisted of miscellaneous locations (i.e.,
other/unknown, public areas, health care facilities, and food
service.)
At
least 90 percent of the exposures caused no or minimal health
effects. There were three deaths. None of the pesticide complaints
were linked to atrazine exposures.
I
recently spoke with Barbara Brooks, the state toxicologist, who said
some Kauai County Council members had asked the DOH to “biomonitor
people for pesticide residue,” which she said is “very
resource-intensive.” It's typically been done only in Superfund
sites, and by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR).
Hawaii farm
workers are regularly tested for pesticide poisoning, including
organophosphates and heavy metals like mercury, arsenic and lead, she
said. But DOH isn't seeing evidence of poisoning even among workers with direct exposure.
“I
believe we should be putting our resources into making sure
pesticides are applied properly,” said Brooks, noting the
overwhelming majority of pesticide exposure calls originated from
residential use.
Dr.
Carl Berg of the Kauai chapter of the Surfrider Foundation termed the statewide pesticide
sampling now under way a “great study.” Though the
organization
has done some pesticide sampling in the past, he said, “Surfrider won't
continue its testing until the results are available from the DOH
study, so that the tests will most accurately assess the presence of
pesticides in the environment."
But
no matter how many tests are done, some folks will remain
unconvinced. Blogger Andy Parx dismissed the atrazine study as “lies,
damnable lies and statistics,”
though he offered nothing to refute it. And Terry Lilley, refusing to
accept that the chromium, arsenic and other metals he found in ocean
sediment are naturally occurring in Kauai's volcanic soil, wrote in
an email:
Weather
[sic] or not the heavy metals are "natural" they should not
be out on the reef in the first place!
I'm
not sure how he proposes to stop the islands from eroding. Even “home
rule” won't halt that act of nature.
Thank you Joan for continuing to bring us the real story. That banner should read "shame on Hooser". Would be interesting to see how much this 2491 debacle has cost us!
ReplyDeleteI do not see what science has to do with anything. Keep science out.
ReplyDeleteUH, JOAN, HOW MUCH DID THE CHEMICAL COMPANIES PAY YOU TO WRITE THIS PIECE OF MALARKEY. Standard industry practice..dismiss any contamination due to human activity as "naturally occuring."
ReplyDeletedid you know radon is also naturally occuring? I'm sure the officials at the Fukushima power plant use that line too...ok..so you're for pesticide use or your against it? What about roundup..is that naturally occuring?
Lead, arsenic and mercury are all naturally occuring, but not when they are unnaturally applied to land for agribusiness uses and washed out to sea. that's not natural.
WHAT ON EARTH HAS HAPPENED TO YOU?
1:57 PM wtf? Here Joan reports on the DOH actually doing what you guys have asked for , testing, and that's bad?
ReplyDelete1:57 pm -- Mmmm, nothing has happened to me, but you seem to have a problem with reading comprehension and no understanding of basic science and chemistry. There is very definitely a difference between naturally occurring chemicals and heavy metals and those intentionally introduced into the environment.
ReplyDeleteAnd it wasn't "industry" that discredited Lilley's study, it was Don Heacock, Surfrider's Carl Berg and a Dept of Health scientist.
Out of all the people that commented. Have any one of you worked or did agriculture? Did any one of you know that from the start of the sugar industry to maybe late 80's and early 90's no protective gear was used but all the works of that job of spraying pesticide is healthy and still living.
ReplyDeleteJoan,
ReplyDeleteGood to bring out actual facts. Of course someone makes the shill accusation, but that just means they can't actually argue with the facts. Homeowners are always the least responsible and informed users of pesticides.