07/13/05 No spray buffers remain

07/13/05 No spray buffers remain

Last year, a federal judge in Seattle agreed that a pesticide no spray buffer zone was needed along waterways of Washington, Oregon, and California that contained habitat for endangered and threatened species. The reason for the ruling stemmed from the Environmental Protection Agnecy's failure to consult with N.O.A.A. Fisheries on pesticide use along such waterways. A coalition of ag, farm chemical, and landowner groups appealed the ruling, saying it was not based on whether or not the listed pesticides were harmful to fish and other species, but on a procedural error. That appeal was recently heard before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. And a Ninth Circuit panel upheld the no-spray buffer. So Heather Hansen of Washington Friends of Farms and Forests, what is the coalition's next step to remove the buffers? HANSEN: We haven't yet decided whether we will appeal again. We're still discussing that. It's disappointing to have the court make this decision. They just sort of rubber stamped the lower court decision. And I'm not sure that they understand everything that's involved. Two things have happened since the original ruling last year. E.P.A., N.O.A.A. Fisheries, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife have streamlined their consultation procedures and are working closer together. And E.P.A. has found thirty of the fifty-four crop protection products listed in the initial case could be used near waterways without requiring a buffer. Despite all that, Hansen and other no spray buffer opponents say growers are still being penalized.
Previous Report07/12/05 The cherry crop looks good
Next Report07/14/05 The transition