State's bid to OK toxic fumigant draws thousands of e-mail protests
By Jim Wasserman
jwasserman@sacbee.com
Published: Saturday, Jun. 5, 2010 - 12:00 am 

A proposed decision to register the controversial toxic fumigant methyl iodide for use in California has sparked thousands of opposing e-mails, a Department of Pesticide Regulation official said Friday.

"We've had thousands of comments, overwhelmingly from opponents," said DPR spokeswoman Lea Brooks.

Most are from e-mails, she said. Still to come are comments from most industry and agricultural groups, which often wait until just before deadlines expire.

Opponents aim to block state approval for methyl iodide as a substitute for the ozone-depleting fumigant methyl bromide. Organizers said they've rallied members and sympathizers to contact state chemical regulators.

"We've been collecting comments though e-mail lists and blasts," said Paul Towers, state director of Pesticide Watch. "We believe methyl iodide is too toxic for use in California."

On April 30, the state proposed to let strawberry and nursery stock growers use the liquid before planting, to rid soil of insects, weeds and pathogens that spread disease and rot in plants. As use of the soil sterilizer methyl bromide has declined to half the state's 37,000 acres of strawberries, growers want alternatives, according to farm groups.

Critics, including a scientific review panel commissioned by the DPR, argue that methyl iodide isn't the answer. They say its use could contaminate groundwater even as it removes a threat to the ozone layer. Others fear for the safety of farmworkers and applicators handling the toxic liquid.

Several scientists on DPR's review panel will testify at a June 17 hearing before the state Senate Food and Agriculture Committee. Chairman Dean Florez, D-Shafter is a vocal critic of methyl iodide.

The DPR's proposed approval was conditional, adding restrictions beyond those used in other states. County agricultural commissioners can impose even more rules.

"This is a very toxic material and our conditions reflect that," said Brooks.

The conditions allow just one-fifth the chemical exposure to handlers than is allowed for their counterparts nationally. California buffer zones will be larger and application rates lower. The state's decision also bans night applications and allows use on fewer acres at one time.

The DPR, citing high public interest, recently extended its comment period to June 29. A final decision on use of methyl iodide is expected to take months, Brooks said.

"We will review the public comments and determine if there is new information that may result in a revision of the proposed decision," she said.

State officials must also wait for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to issue a special California-only label for the fumigant that will detail all the specific requirements and restrictions necessary to use methyl iodide.

"No labeling decisions can be made until the comments have been analyzed," EPA spokesman Dale Kemery said Friday. The EPA approved use of methyl iodide in 2007. Only California, New York and Washington have not yet allowed it, according to DPR.

Tokyo-based Arysta LifeScience Corp. has been seeking California registration of methyl iodide since 2002.

Jeff Tweedy, head of business development at the firm's North Carolina offices, said Friday, "The product will be available within weeks of getting a final stamped label."

Tweedy characterized DPR's proposed decision as "a step in the right direction."

Arysta maintains that its product is safe and leaves no detectable residue in soil. The firm said methyl iodide doesn't affect groundwater when used properly and isn't transmitted to plants or food.

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/06/05/2799752/states-bid-to-ok-toxic-fumigant.html