• Learn About Colony Collapse Disorder and How to Protect Bees
  • Weeds Can Be Managed Without Chemical Pesticides
  • SNAP Tour of Organic Vegetable Garden
  • LIving Near Fields Increases Pesticide Exposure
  • Learn to Manage Pests Naturally
  • Driving Near Recently Sprayed Fields Exposes People to Pesticides
  • Learn To Manage Weeds Without Chemical Pesticides
  • Grow a Lush Garden Organically
  • Learn to Keep Insects Out of your Crops
  • SNAP Display at Event

Legislation/Regulatory

I am sorry that some links on this page and pages linked to it (mostly government of Canada and Saskatchewan) no longer work. Don't blame me, blame our governments which seem to be intent in making relevant information harder and harder to locate. I have left the info here because I am still inquiring about the new link locations and will update them as I find them.

more on legislation under bylaws. Also in fact sheets for individual chemicals

Banned pesticide implicated in 2016 bald eagle poisoning  (Dorchester Banner, Jun 29th, 2019)   This US story illustrates a major problem with pesticide regulation. Carbofuran (trade name Furedan) has also been banned in Canada for a while. Unfortunately, in Canada, when a product is federally banned, it is only from sale, not use. Products can be banned from use by provinces, and/or municipalities when there are no pre-emption laws. In fact, pesticide companies usually have sales of the pesticide before the last legal sale date or donate products to groups. A New York area activist mentioned that, after chlorpyrifos was banned in schools, stocks were donated or sold to those looking after school grounds. (Organizing for Local Policy Changes, Beyond Pesticides conference 2019) Somewhat defeating the purpose to protect children, isn't it? Also filed under wildlife/birds 

Roundup’s Risks Could Go Well Beyond Cancer   Evidence of the cheap herbicide’s danger to biological functions and the environment continues to mount. Why are U.S. regulators not listening?  (By Mark Buchanan, Bloomberg Opinion, June 4, 2019)  'Both the EPA and the EFSA relied on information provided by researchers linked to the industry and considered studies provided by the industry that were not peer-reviewed or made public. The IARC relied solely on publicly available peer-reviewed research.'  ' In both the U.S. and Europe, the supposedly safe limits for human ingestion are based on long-outdated science. Research also points to serious adverse consequences for the environment, and there are indications glyphosate can cause disease in mammals even several generations removed from the initial exposure.'   SNAP comment: The article does not answer its question other than pointing out the narrow scope of studies which regulatory agencies evaluate. I can add the mandatory 'risk-benefit assessment' where use is considered a benefit and need and trumps any negative health and environmental effects. This, in my view, is 'long outdated science', as well as the belief that there is a 'safe' dose at which there is no effect, and the unscientific way this is calculated. 

Settlement Bans Some Bee-Toxic Pesticides, Requires Public Comment Period on Testing All Pesticide Product Ingredients and Regulating Pesticide-Treated Seeds  (Beyond Pesticides, January 4, 2019)  USA with comments for Canada. 'The settlement sets in motion a number of actions and expectations, among which is the potential cancellation of the 59 pesticide registrations. The first public action was the posting in the Federal Register of two notices of EPA seeking public comment on petitions from CFS. One requests the revision of testing requirements for pesticides prior to their registration — including requiring “testing for whole pesticide formulations to account for the toxicological effects of inert and adjuvant ingredients and the testing of tank mixes to assess the interaction between pesticide ingredients. CFS believes this change is needed to meet the applicable safety standards of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).” The second requests that EPA “initiate a rulemaking or issue a formal Agency interpretation for planted seeds treated with systemic insecticides. CSF believes that the Agency EPA has improperly applied the treated article exemption in exempting these products from registration and labeling requirements under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).” Comments on both, which are due on or before March 21, 2019, can be directed as described here.'   SNAP Comment: Wow! testing formulations and regulating seeds treated with pesticides as pesticides rather than exempting them. I had no knowledge of the exemption for treated seeds but, under  Regulatory Directive: Harmonization of Regulation of Pesticide Seed Treatment in Canada and the United States (11 April 2003) "In issuing this regulation, the EPA reasoned that the risks of treated seeds that meet the above criteria could adequately be regulated by means of registration of the treating pesticide. In evaluating the risks of the seed treatment, the EPA could also evaluate the risks from exposure to the seed treated according to the label instructions and forgo the need for a separate evaluation and registration of the treated seed...both countries have essentially similar legislation, regulatory frameworks, labelling, colouration and packaging requirements to mitigate risk associated with handling of the treated seed and to prevent its diversion to use as a food or feed." 

Mixtures of Multiple Pesticide Ingredients in Products Not Evaluated by EPA for Elevated Toxicity (Beyond Pesticides, July 21, 2016)   'An investigative report released yesterday by Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) concludes that, over the past six years, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has approved nearly 100 pesticide products with chemical mixtures that elevate the formulations’ toxicity, but are not specifically evaluated by the agency.'...'The report Toxic Concoctions: How the EPA Ignores the Dangers of Pesticide Cocktails, highlights a long-running blind spot within EPA’s pesticide evaluation program: the risk associated with combining mixtures of different pesticide active ingredients, which independent science shows may be more toxic than a single active ingredient by itself, also known as pesticide synergism.'NOTE: The same is true for Canada.

European Union Completes 16-Year Review of Pesticides (Beyond Pesticides, March 20, 2009) Posted in International. Includes database on active substances. 

Preemption Provision in Proposed Chemical Law Draws Ire from States (Beyond Pesticides, August 5, 2013) Preemption laws  refers to the ability of one level of government to override laws of a lower level. The proposed law would prohibit judicial review of EPA’s designation of a chemical as “high” or “low priority.” In a dizzying catch-22, states would be unable both to challenge in court EPA’s designation of a chemical, and adopt and enforce new laws regulating these chemicals. CSIA would prevent states from regulating chemicals months or even years before a single protective federal regulation becomes effective. This would leave an enormous safety gap -exposing human health and the environment to undue harm.

Canada

view details »

Endocrine Disruption  also see endocrine disruption 

EPA's failure to act on endocrine disruptors which threaten public health   'Despite operating for 21 years, the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) has made little progress in reviewing and regulating endocrine-disrupting pesticides. As of 2019, the program has stalled entirely.'

Canada: As of July 2017, andin spite of international commitment, we were not doing much either. 

Scientific Justification to Address Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (EDCs): A Roadmap for Action A Submission to the 2016-2017 Parliamentary Review of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) (by Canadian Ennvironmental Law Asssociation and other groups,31 July 2017)  'A number of limitations within the risk based approach for chemicals assessment and management that are applied by many countries including Canada that prevent an effective approach to identify, assess and manage many chemicals, particularly EDCs... Regulatory regimes for chemicals under CEPA and for pesticides under the Pest Control Products Act (PCPA) rely on traditional toxicological testing, assessment and risk management. This framework is not amenable to reliably detect and respond to scientific evidence related to the long-term health effects of exposures to EDCs. Special techniques and decision-making framework are needed for EDCs...Chemical assessment assumes that observations of “no adverse effect” when a chemical is tested at levels above environmental levels (possibly 100 to 3000-fold or higher concentrations) means that the chemical is “safe” at lower concentrations. Thus, environmentally relevant testing may not occur, despite knowledge that EDCs can cause effects at low doses or concentrations, that do not manifest at higher levels.' also read the quotes under Canada’s commitment on EDCs under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 and the answer 'Canada’s position that endocrine disruptors may induce effects that are not necessarily adverse is problematic, as early life exposure to endocrine disruptors may have delayed adverse effects that are not necessarily endpoints in traditional toxicological testing'

Technical approach for "rapid screening" of substances of lower ecological concern, Appendix B   (Date modified: 2017-04-19)

ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS UPDATE, (Prepared by:Christine Labelle, Science and Technology Division, 10 August 2000) very old! summary mention of organicllorines and pesticides.

------

Has Ottawa sold out to Big Agro and its toxic chemicals?   (By Bruce Livesey, Canada's National Observer, July 25th 2017)  (#1 of 2 articles from the Special Report: Bureau of Poison) SNAP Comment: If pesticides work, why are we using more and more every year? Well researched article. 'According to Statistics Canada, the area of farmland treated with herbicides, insecticides and fungicides increased by 3 per cent, 42 per cent and 114 per cent respectively between 2001 and 2011. In Canada, 100 million kilograms of pesticides were sold in Canada in 2014 – up from 82 million kilograms in 2009.'... 'However, the Auditor General of Canada has carried out three investigations... into the PMRA since 2003 — and found it wanting.' 'In response to the Auditor’s 2015 report, last year the PMRA announced it was going to stop giving conditional registrations – but only on new pesticides, not those currently on the market. This winter, Health Canada began considering phasing out one class of neonicsimidacloprid, due to its impact on aquatic insects – but only over a three-to-five year time frame. ' "Rarely will (PMRA) take a pesticide off the market,” says Cooper. “They will tweak the label or they will add additional requirements or mitigation for the workers or application rates… But you never get to ‘Boy, this thing is bad news’.”    'But more significantly, the PMRA uses a “risk-based” assessment model that critics believe ensures no pesticide could ever be banned. But more significantly, the PMRA uses a “risk-based” assessment model that critics believe ensures no pesticide could ever be banned. '... 'Back in Alvinston, Ontario, Munro Honey continues to struggle to keep its bees alive. While queen bees used to last three to four years, Munro finds now they usually only live a year. '

Ottawa ignoring hazards of top pesticides sold in Canada   (By Bruce Livesey, Canada National Observer, August 9th 2017)  (#2 of 2 articles from the Special Report: Bureau of Poison)   "and instead of coming up with better chemistry or more organic methods or whatever, (the PMRA) just replace bad chemistry with bad chemistry. And that happens repeatedly." Cooper says. This article presents the research and evidence on three case studies. Atrazine: birth defects and other health effects. 500,000 kg/yr is used in Canada where it contaminates water in several provinces including SK. The article also looks at neonicotinoids: more than 300,000 kilograms of neonics are used on Canadian crops every year with documented widespread contamination and effects on bees. It presents evidence that the PMRA is relying on poor industry studies for their pesticide assessment. and finally Glyphosate (the most popular herbicide sold in the world and in Canada - where over 25 million kilograms is used every year in 700 herbicide formulations.) 'Glyphosate is now found in food, drinking water and other beverages, honey, etc. A study in Germany last year found that 99.6 per cent of those (people) tested had traces of glyphosate in their blood.'  'As noted in Part One of our investigation into the PMRAcritics of the agency say it turns a blind eye to evidence that popular herbicides and insecticides are causing massive impacts on the environment and to human health. They accuse the PMRA of, in effect, being “captured” by the very agrochemical companies it’s supposed to be overseeing, such as SyngentaBayerDow-Dupont, Monsanto and BASF.'

Popular nicotine-based pesticides pose risk to aquatic insects: Health Canada  (By Kelsey Johnson, ipolitics, Aug 15, 2018)  'Scott Kirby, director general for Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency, told reporters the phasing out of all outdoor uses of the neonicotinoid pesticides (thiamethoxam and clothianadinwould occur over three to five years, once the ban is approved. Midges and mayflies are a key food source for birds and fish. The agency started its review of the two pesticides in November 2016. The length of the phase-out, currently subject to a 90-day consultation period, will depend upon whether alternative products are available. PMRA proposed a ban on outdoor uses of imidacloprid in November 2016 amid concerns about the health of mayflies and midges. A final decision is expected in December 2018, Kirby said. None of the proposed bans are currently in effect. All are subjected to public consultation. Final decisions on whether to ban thiamethoxam and clothianadin are expected in 2019.'  SNAP Comment: In their own words, it does not matter how toxic a product is, it has to have a replacement "product' before it is banned. In the meantime, God forbid they ever consider that the 'product' may not be needed at all under other methods of farming that protect biodiversity. The good news is that we can still contribute comments to the public consultation.  Also see  fact sheet/neonicotinoids.

New Pest Control Products Act (Canada)  The new Pest Control Products Act (2002) received Royal Assent on December 12, 2002, and came into force on June 28, 2006. It is easier to access the Act through this government of Canada site. Scroll down the page for links.

Other related Acts and regulations: The PMRA must also consider other Acts, such as the Pesticide Residue Compensation Act (PRCA) and the Food and Drugs Act (FDA), which have an impact on pest management. In addition, the PMRA follows the Agriculture and Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties Act as an enforcement tool for the PCPA. Scroll down the page for links. Canadian Environmental Protection Act: guidelines and objectives

Regulations 

NOTE: The whole Health Canada web site has been redesigned, including the PMRA's. Much important information is under 'registrants' section. The A-Z index is not useful for anything other than general public information. Searches should be directed as such: PMRA and DIR for directives, PMRA and REG for registration decisions, PMRA and REV for re-evaluation, or scroll down to Additional information/reports and publications, then Decisions and updates. Please do not assume I have the latest information on regulations or other government documents. I suggest that you google 'Pest Control Products Regulations amendments' to ensure you have the latest version.

Label searches can be accessed here

PMRA Decisions and Updates

If you cannot find what you are looking for, contact:

Pest Management Information Service
Pest Management Regulatory Agency
Health Canada
2720 Riverside Drive
Ottawa, Ontario
Address Locator: 6606D2
K1A 0K9

E-mail: pmra.infoserv@hc-sc.gc.ca
Telephone: 613-736-3799
Toll-free: 1-800-267-6315
Facsimile: 613-736-3798
Teletypewriter: 1-800-267-1245 (Health Canada)

Suscribe to various update services (Health Canada) such as Pesticides and Pest Management: All new publications, including regulatory documents, fact sheets and other important updates related to pesticide regulation predominantly published by the Pest Management Regulatory Agency will be posted by this RSS feed and many others.

Canada ends 'weed-n-feed'   The PMRA, Canada's agency in charge of pesticide regulation, made a bold move this week, announcing the phaseout of all pesticide and fertilizer combination products by December 2012 (PanUps, Feb19, 2010)

In Canada, Feds Use False Sound Science to Regulate Carcinogens(Jun. 12, 2006)

 List of Formulants 2010 replace List of Formulants 2007 which is no longer available on the internet and, in turn, replaced Regulatory Note REG2005-01, PMRA List of Formulants. In this version, a list of formulant trade names, usually formulant mixtures, has been added to the list of single substance formulants.   

The list is apparently now updated twice/year(2019) links and more on formulants

more on legislation under bylaws

 

Saskatchewan

view details »

Pest Control Products (Saskatchewan) Act

Pest Control Products Regulations (link updated to 2015 regulations)

Pest Control Act

Pest Control Regulations such as Bacterial Ring Rot Control Regulations, Late Blight Control Regulations and others

Applicator, Vendor and Service Licenses

Until pesticides were brought to the table at the Strategy for a Green and Prosperous Economy (2005), none of the classes for these licenses included any information on alternative or reduced use pesticide. We were told at the meeting that a section on Integrated Pest Management (IPM) would be developed and included in the SIAST classes.  I have no idea if that has been implemented as the Strategy was discarded shortly after the Sask Party was elected. 

Saskatchewan Pesticide Use presentation by Cameron Wilks of Sask Agriculture and Foods to the Strategy for a Green and Prosperous Economy (2005)  There is absolutely no mandatory training for anyone selling domestic pesticides because no provincial license is currently required for sales of domestic sales.

SK Agriculture still handles Chemical Complaints although the process is now different. "If people have a drift complaint, they usually contact us and we refer them to the Provincial Pesticide Investigator. We have a few questions we are required to ask to be sure the parties involved have done their due diligence in solving the issue before the investigator gets involved."  Colleen Seaman, Agriculture Knowledge Centre, Ministry of Agriculture colleen.seaman@gov.sk.ca

PH:  1-866-457-2377
Or:  (306) 694-3899
Fax:  (306) 694-3938
  
Sk Agriculture only deals with damage to crops from herbicides. It is suggested that people handle their own problems. Damage to human or animal health or environment from any pesticide product is not dealt with in this document. All health matters are referred to the PMRA since there is an Adverse Effect reporting since 2007.

Pesticide Container Disposal

There is a voluntary Saskatchewan program for commercial pesticides container disposal, and a periodic short-term program for return of obsolete commercial pesticides.

 Obsolete Pesticide Collection Campaign no current link found. In his presentation, Mr Friesen mentions that provincial campaigns run every 4 year, the last SK campaign was in October 2007 and collected 124,516 kgs . Another should have run in 2011.

As of fall 2005, there was no program for "safe" disposal or return of domestic pesticide containers or obsolete domestic pesticides, in spite of CropLife Canada saying in their annual reports that container disposal programs exist. For up to date information on Hazarouls Waste Disposal in your community, check with the SK Waste Reduction Council.

Europe

view details »

European Regulators Ban Carcinogenic, Frog-Killing Fungicide  (Beyond Pesticides, April 4, 2019) Contamination of drinking water with toxic breakdown products and risks to fish and and amphibians has led to a ban on the fungicide chlorothalonil in the European Union (EU)... Chlorothalonil has been in use since the 1960s, yet only now are regulators beginning to understand its impacts to human health, water quality, pollinators and aquatic species; after half a century and tens of millions of pounds of use. Cases like these are not rare, or an exception, but frustratingly common in the world of pesticide regulation.' SNAP Comment: There are currently 36 chlorothalonil  products registered for use by the PMRA in Canada.

New German Government Would Ban Glyphosate Herbicides in Shock to Monsanto-Bayer Merger (12 January 2018)  In a shock announcement Friday, Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union of Germany (CDU) and the Social Democrats (SPD) have agreed on a blueprint for formal grand coalition negotiations, which includes a complete ban on glyphosate herbicides. Details of the suggested ban are yet to be announced.

French Prime Minister Retains Bee-Toxic Neonicotinoid Pesticide Ban  (Beyond Pesticides, June 27, 2017) French Prime Minister, Edouard Philippe, is retaining the neonicotinoid (neonic) pesticide ban, which is set to go into effect in 2018 and is stronger than the current European Union restrictions on neonics.

European Court Decision Rules in Favor of Increased Pesticide Transparency (Beyond Pesticides, December 1, 2016)  A groundbreaking decision by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) last Wednesday ruled in favor of the environmental nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) and Greenpeace Nederland, which had been denied access to industry studies and other information submitted by chemical companies to European regulators on the controversial weedkiller glyphosate and the bee-toxic insecticide imidacloprid. The Court found that “emissions into the environment” includes releases from pesticide products or active ingredients contained in these products, as long as the release is possible under realistic conditions of use of this product. It interpreted the “information on emissions into the environment” to cover information relating to the nature, composition, and quantity of those emissions, but also “information enabling the public to check whether the assessment is correct, as well as the data relating to the medium or long-term effects of those emissions.” This decision will allow for any interested party to obtain industry studies and underlying data that were submitted to European regulatory agencies for pesticide review and approval...This is a huge win for environmental organizations that have long been critical of the lack of transparency in the government review process of pesticides. And while it does not apply to regulatory decisions in the U.S., it sets a legal precedent going forward. SNAP Comment: In Canada, I believe this information is available to see in a secure facility where no recording device of any kind is allowed. I hope a pen and paper are allowed.

Regulators Bow to Pressure from American Trade Lobby on Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals (Beyond Pesticides, May 28, 2015)  leading to scrapping draft criteria that could have led to a ban on over 30 endocrine (hormone) disrupting chemical (EDCs) in the European Union (EU). More on endocrine disruptiion at http://www.snapinfo.ca/info/health/endocrine-disruption

International

view details »

Bending to International Industry Pressure, Thailand Walks Back Toxic Chemical Bans  (Beyond Pesticides, December 4, 2019) 'Last week, Thailand’s government shifted course from banning three toxic pesticides to only restricting the use of glyphosate and delaying the enforcement of bans on paraquat and chlorpyrifos. After an initially strong stance, the government is now bending to pressure from the U.S. government and the chemical-intensive farming industry... 16% of Thailand’s population is employed in the agricultural sector. The country is a substantial exporter of rice, rubber, and sugar. While this story has indeed taken a disappointing turn, the farmer backlash offers a case study for where single-chemical bans – though they can be an important in a short-term goal – can go wrong. The focus in Thailand is on the replacement of the banned toxic chemicals with substitutes instead of holistic, organic practices that are safe for people and the environment. '

Brazil Approves 262 New Hazardous Pesticides, Makes Death Sole Criteria for Toxicity  (Beyond Pesticides, August 1, 2019) Last month, the Brazilian Ministry of Agriculture approved the registration of 51 additional hazardous pesticides and brought the total to 262 newly approved pesticides this year.

International Lawsuits under NAFTA

view details »

Trade agreements allows foreign companie to seek compensation for lost profits.

NAFTA pesticide ban challenge settled without money No compensation for DowAgroSciences after Quebec outlaws lawn pesticide. CBC News, May 30, 2011

Ontario’s Cosmetic Pesticide Ban and Dow Chemical’s Challenge under NAFTA to the Quebec Pesticide Code Presentation to Pesticides Webinar convened by the Canadian Network on Human Health and the Environment. Kathleen Cooper, CELA, May 21, 2009p. 13 explains the NAFTA dispute settling process.

Dow sues Canadian government over Que.'s pesticide ban Juliette O'neil, Canwest News Service, 9 April 2009.

Dow Invokes NAFTA To Challenge Canadian Pesticide Bans (Beyond Pesticides, October 30, 2008)

Cases Filed Against the Government of Canada under NAFTA chapter 11. Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada.

USA

view details »

also see Pesticides in Food and Pyrethrins and Pyrethroids 

Environmental Groups Are Victorious in Lawsuit that Pushes EPA to Protect Endangered Species  (Beyond Pesticides, October 31, 2019)'Last week the U.S. District Court in San Francisco ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must assess the risk eight toxic pesticides pose to protected organisms: atrazine, carbaryl, methomyl, and simazine as well as rodenticides brodifacoum, bromadiolone, warfarin and zinc phosphide.  “It is inappropriate that environmental groups are forced to expend time and resources in order to get EPA to simply do its job as the law requires,” says Barbara Dale, Public Education Manager at Beyond Pesticides. also includes some alarming “fun” facts on a few of these toxic chemicals.'

Health and Environmental Groups Call on EPA to Revoke Glyphosate’s Registration  (Beyond Pesticides, September 4, 2019) Sixteen organizations representing health, environmental, farmer, and farmworker communities joined together yesterday to call on EPA to remove glyphosate from the marketplace. The groups cite a combination of high-profile lawsuits, environmental impacts, increasing reports of weed resistance, and growing public concern over the health effects of glyphosate in their comments on EPA’s interim reregistration review decision for the chemical. The comments warn that EPA is at risk of damaging the public’s trust in the agency’s review process for toxic pesticides. The article also ' replies to EPA’s attacks against the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).

Dismissing independent Peer-Reviewed Science, EPA Allows Dramatic Increase in Children’s Exposure to Toxic Pesticides Pushed by Industry   (Beyond Pesticides, August 6, 2019) In a move that challenges the preponderance of independent peer-reviewed scientific findings on children’s health, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently stripped away protections that limit children’s exposure to class of chemicals associated with childhood cancer, autism, and other learning disorders...EPA looked at hundreds of peer-reviewed studies, but only incorporated two into its determination. The vast majority of studies reviewed by EPA were considered low quality by the agency’s subjective criteria, and effectively ignored. Instead, the agency prioritized methodology put forth by CAPHRA and encouraged by Croplife. Under the CAPHRA model, pyrethroids were estimated to be metabolized by children at the same rate as adults'. SNAP Comment: The last statement defies science and evidence. 

Fulfilling Legal Settlement with Limited Scope, EPA Cancels Twelve Neonicotinoid Products (Beyond Pesticides, May 23, 2019)  'The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the final notices of cancellationon the registration of twelve neonicotinoid pesticide products in the Federal Register, each of which contains chlothianidin or thiamathoxam as an active ingredient... The case establishes a legal precedent in which the court required action to address the bee-toxic effects of pesticides; however, the effect of the settlement and its impact on overall neonicotinoid and other systemic insecticide use is limited'. 'For all but two of the twelve canceled products, a nearly identical surrogate remains actively registered. Furthermore, the fact remains that there are hundreds more products containing the active ingredients targeted by the lawsuit that have not been removed in any capacity – 106 products containing clothianidin and 95 containing thiamethoxam remain untouched on the market. Breaking down the impacts of the EPA ruling even further, there are several eerily similar classes of insecticides that operate the same way neonicotinoids do that remain untouched by regulation. The sulfoxamine insecticide sufloxaflor, for example, is functionally identical to the neonicotinoid imidacloprid, '“The federal pesticide law is a weak statute and offers limited protection for bees, the ecosystem, and public health” said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides. 

Center for Food Safety wins in case to force EPA to ban 12 neonicotinoids   (Food Safety News, By Dan Flynn on May 22, 2019)    'Final notices of cancellation for the registration of 12 neonicotinoid pesticides have been published in the Federal Register by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency...The decision to pull the pesticides from the market was part of a legal settlement reached in December 2018 involving the Center for Food Safety and the EPA.'  

Trump Officials Propose to Rollback Endangered Species Protection, Break Agreements to Act, and Block Public Review of Decisions   (Beyond Pesticides, May 13, 2019) The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) filed four lawsuits last week challenging the Trump administration’s failure to release a trove of documents detailing how the administration is regulating dangerous pesticides, especially as they relate to endangered species...The proposal disregards the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences and ignores the mandate of the Endangered Species Act to give imperiled wildlife and plants the benefit of the doubt when evaluating the range of impacts caused by exposure to pesticides.'

Inspector General Challenges EPA’s Allowance of Off-Label “Emergency” Pesticide Use (Beyond Pesticides, September 27, 2018)  'The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) released a report finding the agency’s practice of routinely granting “emergency” approval through its Section 18 program for pesticide use does not effectively measure risks to human health or the environment. OIG’s report finds “significant deficiencies in the OPP’s online database management, in its draft Section 18 emergency exemption standard operating procedure and application checklist, and in its reports to Congress and the Office of Management and Budget.'

California Court Ruling Ends Decades of State Pesticide Spraying (EcoWatch)  "The judge has told the state that harmful pesticides simply can't be sprayed indiscriminately, without robust consideration of impacts on people, animals and water," said Bill Allayaud, California director of government affairs for the Environmental Working Group. "The ruling also affirms that Californians have the right to know about pesticides being sprayed around them and the ability to challenge spraying that endangers public health and natural resources."

Did Dow Chemical Influence the EPA Administrator’s Decision to Reverse Chlorpyrifos Ban?(Beyond Pesticides, June 30, 2017) Scott Pruitt, Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), met privately with Dow Chemical’s CEO several weeks before reversing EPA’s tentative decision to ban chlorpyrifos...Mr. Pruitt stated that his decision was founded on “meaningful data and meaningful science.” However, AP followed up with EPA to provide details on this science, and Mr. Pruitt’s office replied with quotes from trade groups and USDA, but failed to provide any scientific studies on the chemical’s safety.

Court Revokes Federal Approval of Nanotech Pesticide  (Beyond Pesticides, June 6, 2017) Last week, the U .S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit concluded that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) failed to show that its conditional registration of the antimicrobial, nano-silver pesticide product “NSPW-L30SS” (previously “Nanosilva”) is in the public interest and revoked its registration. According to the Center for Food Safety, the Court’s decision is the first of its kind to address EPA’s responsibilities in issuing conditional registrations of new pesticide products like NSPW-L30SS...This case also highlights the deficiencies of the controversial conditional registration process at EPAEPA’s conditional approval of the nanoproduct exemplifies the agency’s allowance of products into the market without sufficient and legally required data. SNAP Comment: Apparently, there are no more conditional pesticide registrations in Canada as of 1 June 1916, but we are still stuck with the 1% of pesticides approved under those such as neonicotinoids. A conditional registration essentially means that a pesticide is approved before all mandatory tests are performed and submitted and the registration does not undergo public consultation.

neonicotinoids again.

Court Holds Bee-killing Pesticide Approvals Violated the Law   (Global Justice Ecology Project, May 10, 2017)   SAN FRANCISCO—A Federal Court has ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) systematically violated the Endangered Species Act (ESA) – a key wildlife protection law – when it approved bee-killing insecticides known as neonicotinoids... Judge Maxine Chesney of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California held that EPA had unlawfully issued 59 pesticide registrations between 2007 and 2012 for a wide variety of agricultural, landscaping and ornamental uses...“This is a vital victory,” said George Kimbrell, Center for Food Safety legal director. ..Seeds coated with bee-killing neonicotinoid insecticides are now used on more than 150 million acres of U.S. corn, soybeans, cotton and other crops – totaling an area bigger than the state of California and Florida combined – the largest use of any insecticides in the country by far. SNAP Comment: It would be harder to win any case in court in Canada because the annual PMRA pesticide sales report is so uninformative that one could not tell. 

Beyond Pesticides Sues Mott’s for Labeling Pesticide-Laden Applesauce “Natural”   (Beyond Pesticides, May 8, 2017) – A national environmental health organization last Friday sued Mott’s, under consumer protection law, for false and misleading “natural” labeling of applesauce products containing a toxic pesticide. The suit argues that the finding of residues in the company’s applesauce of the neonicotinoid insecticide acetamiprid, which is particularly toxic to pollinators, disqualifies the products from being labeled “natural” or as containing “all natural ingredients.”  There are concerns in the scientific literature and European Food Safety Authority about the effect of acetamiprid on human health, particularly children.

Dow Urges Trump Administration to Ignore Pesticide Impacts on Endangered Species (Beyond Pesticides, April 24, 2017)   In letters sent to government officials, lawyers for Dow urge Administration officials and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set aside “biological evaluations” that detail how three highly toxic organophosphate insecticides –chlorpyrifos, malathion and diazinon– harm nearly all 1,800 threatened and endangered animals and plants, claiming the process to be “fundamentally flawed.”

Pesticide Registration Manual: Chapter 1 - Overview of Requirements for Pesticide Registration and Registrant Obligations. Valid as of 26 February 2017.

North Miami Passes IPM Plan in Response to Local Activism (Beyond Pesticides, February 1, 2017) Last week in North Miami, the City Council took a significant step that could reduce pesticide use in the community. The Council adopted an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) policy  aiming to reeducate citizens and county workers on least-toxic pest management strategies with the goal of eliminating toxic pesticide use on city property.  The IPM plan does not address pesticide use on private property, due to state preemption of local authority...As part of a joint project with Organic Consumers AssociationBeyond Pesticides developed a Map of U.S. Pesticide Reform Policies to track state and local efforts to eliminate hazardous pesticides from public and private spaces...Local jurisdictions in many states, Florida included, are limited in their ability to regulate pesticides on private property due to state preemption laws. SNAP Comment: Hopefully, the IPM definition adopted is the correct one which includes starting with the lest toxic method with a definite goal of reduction. It seems to be. Regina's IPM committee failed because of lack of knowledge, lack of reduction goal, and industry interference. 

Ruling Affirmed in Colorado Pesticide Trespass Case (Beyond Pesticides, February 7, 2017) After years of legal battle, the Colorado Court of Appeals last week affirmed a ruling that Colorado rancher, James Hopper, must serve two days in jail and pay a $7,500 fine for spraying pesticides that drifted unto his neighbor’s farm in violation of a 2012 court order protecting his neighbors...Pesticide drift is an inevitable result of pesticide application. Adulticides that are spraying into the air, like the one used by Mr. Hopper, remain suspended in the air and can be carried great distances by the wind...Also reviews previous recent US cases and links to pesticide drift and common sense mosquito control.

Court Rules Against Monsanto, Allows California To Put Cancer Warning On Roundup  (CBS Sacramento, January 27, 2017) California would be the first state to order such labeling if it carries out the proposal. see also Judge Rules Against Monsanto, Allows California to List Glyphosate Products as Cancer Causing (Beyond Pesticides, January 31, 2017) SNAP comment: The article is msleading however on how roundUP is applied. If truly used on 250 crops, it is likely to dessicate (pre-harvest spraying) or chem fallowing. Using it on non RoundUP resistant crop would kill the crops as well as weeds. The US EPA evaluation is outdated and the EPA has been trying to set up a review committee with Monsanto opposing several scientists on the panel. 

EPA Revises Process, But Maintains Proposal to Stop Use of Neurotoxic Chlorpyrifos in Agriculture (Beyond Pesticides, November 15, 2016)  “The revised analyses indicate that expected residues of chlorpyrifos on food crops exceed the safety standard under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),” EPA noted in its announcement. “In addition, the majority of estimated drinking water exposures from currently registered uses, including water exposures from non-food uses, continue to exceed safe levels even taking into account more refined drinking water exposures. “ To explain the decision to the public, EPA has put together a FAQ page on its websiteSNAP comment: Meanwhile in Canada, (15 Nov 2016) there are still 29 registered chlorpyrifos products including two baits for consumers (domestic) and 17 commercial registrations including Lorsban used by municipalities to spray the base of elm trees to prevent transmission of Dutch Elm Disease. I understand the City of Edmonton is still using chlorpyrifos to fog for mosquitoes. 

EPA Registers Dicamba for GE Crops, Adding to Growing Herbicide Resistance Issue (Beyond Pesticides, November 11, 2016) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has registered a new formulation of dicamba to control weeds in cotton and soybean crops that have been genetically engineered (GE) to tolerate the chemical. The new formulation is called Xtendimax™ with Vapor Grip™ Technology, which is claimed to be specifically designed to have lower volatility...An important point of dicamba’s registration is that EPA has specified that the registration is time-limited and will expire after two years... Dicamba has been linked to damage of the kidney and liver, neurotoxicity, and developmental impacts. The chemical has a strong propensity to volatilize small particles of the herbicide into the air and drift far off-site. Sensitive crop species can be damaged by dicamba at levels in the parts per million...A startling number of pesticides, nearly 65% of the more than 16,000 pesticides now on the market, were first approved by the process of “conditional registration.” Meanwhile, the Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Agency finalized its decision to discontinue granting new conditional registrations. SNAP Comments: Dicamba is also widely used lawn herbicide products in formulation with 2,4-D and mecoprop. Conditional registration means that a pesticide was registered before many of the mandatory studies for registration were submitted.

EPA Fines Syngenta $1.2 Million for Multiple Safety Violations under Settlement(Beyond Pesticides, September 27, 2016)   EPA charged Syngenta with three major violations of the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), including: (1) Failure to have repackaging agreement and/or maintain records on registered pesticides; (2) Distributing misbranded pesticides, and; (3) Failure to maintain data submitted for pesticide registration. However, under the consent agreement reached with EPA, the company neither admits nor denies the allegations. “The repackaging, sale and distribution of unregistered and misbranded pesticides is illegal and puts people and the environment at risk. Users rely on accurate, up-to-date information about ingredients, directions for use, hazards and safety precautions,” said Anne Heard, Acting Regional Administrator for the Southeast in an EPA press release.  SNAP NOTE: The label is also the legal document setting rules for use of a particular pesticide. Repackaging often does not come with a copy of a label. The US has a history of large fine while, in Canada, the PMRA is issueing piddly fines whenenver it has to. It generally believes that educating the party is more appropriate.