Daily News Archive
September 12, 2006
Pesticide Restrictions to Safeguard California Frog
(Beyond Pesticides, September 12, 2006) The federal
government is proposing a temporary restriction on 66 pesticides that
scientists have blamed for wiping out the threatened California red-legged
frog in some parts of the state. The proposed regulation comes as part
of a legal settlement between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
for Biological Diversity and the pesticide industry in an effort
to preserve the state's most populous native frog.
"The California red-legged frog is an extraordinary sentinel of
environmental health," said Brent Plater, an attorney with the
Center. "So when frogs remain absent from an area despite the appearance
of a functioning ecology, that may be a warning sign for our own health."
Mr. Plater said the frogs, which have been listed as threatened since
1996, have disappeared from about 70 percent of their former natural
The settlement is open for public comment until Sept. 18, 2006, after
which it must be approved by a federal court, Mr. Plater said. The Center
sued EPA in 2002 for failing to consult with wildlife experts about
the potential effects of pesticides on the frog.
U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey White last September ruled there was
"significant scientific evidence demonstrating potential adverse
effects to the frog" from dozens of pesticides. The temporary pesticide
restrictions would cover 450,000 acres in 20 California counties designated
as critical habitat for the frog.
The 66 chemicals include those often used by farmers such as atrazine,
captan and malathion. If approved by the court, the ban would be in
place for up to three years while EPA examines each chemical and its
effect on the red-legged frog. The studies could include consultations
with Fish and Wildlife Service officials. Permanent restrictions are
possible if the studies show the chemicals hurt the frog.
EPA also has agreed
to publish a bilingual brochure spelling out in English and Spanish
potential dangers to the red-legged frog. Thousands will be distributed
to pesticide applicators, extension agents and state officials.
Until now, the Bush
administration has insisted it simply didn't know how the chemicals
affected the frog.
maintain that they cannot determine the effects of the 66 chemicals
on the California red-legged frog, if any, and define any appropriate
protective measures, if any, until they have completed further scientific
analyses," the new agreement states. Nonetheless, the ruling by
Judge White, an appointee of President Bush's, incited negotiations
among the various parties.
The proposed pesticide
ban would not extend to weed control or a number of other specified
applications, such as use of the chemicals on indoor house plants. The
proposed restrictions come a year after endangered species activists
won an important
lawsuit reigning in EPA’s decade-long failure to protect the
California red-legged frog from 66 of the most toxic and persistent
pesticides authorized for use in California. (See Daily
News Story 9-27-05) In this case, Judge White found that EPA violated
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by registering pesticides for use without
considering how these pesticides might impact the continued existence
of the red-legged frog. The court determined that because EPA registered
pesticides for use in, or upwind, of the frog’s few remaining
habitats, EPA was required to review the impacts these pesticides have
on the frog “at the earliest possible time.” The court thus
ordered EPA to initiate “consultation” under ESA, our nation’s
safety net for imperiled fish, wildlife, and plants.
Press (AP); Contra
TAKE ACTION: Send comments to EPA encouraging
approval of the settlement and interim pesticide restrictions to protect
the red-legged Frog. Comments must be received by September 18, 2006.
Suggested comments and an easy form to fill out to submit the comments
can be found at the Center for Biological Diversity’s website.comments
can be found at the Center for Biological Diversity’s website.