Pesticide Run off into waterways

Various discussions related to Chemical Pesticides, Herbicides, Etc.

Pesticide Run off into waterways

Postby adminjt » Sat Dec 11, 2010 11:46 pm

Australia’s most dangerous pesticides found yet again in Tasmania’s water catchments

Dr Alison Bleaney, Tasmanian Public and Environmental Health Network MR
26.07.10 10:35 am
Image for Australia’s most dangerous pesticides found yet again in Tasmania’s water catchments

The Tasmanian Public and Environmental Health Network (TPEHN) has today condemned the Tasmanian Government for failing to protect water catchments in Tasmania.

“Recently released data from DPIPWE on pesticide monitoring of 55 Tasmanian water catchments from July 2005 to July 2010 continues to expose the lack of adequate risk assessment and protection of raw drinking water sources in Tasmania,” said Dr Alison Bleaney.

“DPIPWE currently monitors for only 19 pesticides whereas a total of 77 pesticides currently in use in Tasmania have now been listed on ‘Australia’s most toxic pesticides list.”

“The latest very limited DPIPWE flood monitoring reports again show MCPA and 2,4-D in the Duck and George rivers. Detections at the water intake for St Helens (George River) showed MCPA and 2,4-D on 17/6/10 and 2,4-D on 27/6/10; and the Duck River showed MCPA on 18/6/10 to 21/6/10 and 2,4-D on 18/6/10 and 19/6/10 and MCPA on 27/6/10 to 1/7/10.

“Both of these pesticides are on the National Toxic Networks ‘Australia’s most toxic pesticides list”.

“The Coal River has been found to have the most number of different pesticide detections of any river in Tasmania with 4 on the ‘Australia’s most toxic pesticides list’. Only 3 rivers (Duck, George and Esperance) in Tasmania currently have flood monitoring for pesticides.”

“These results from DPIPWE demonstrate the lack of protection of water catchments in Tasmania and the disregard of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines with regard to the need to provide adequate risk assessments of drinking water catchments (e.g. pesticides and other contaminants such as heavy metals) in raw drinking water sources.”

“This is completely unacceptable to all water users.” said Dr Bleaney.

Download, Dangerous Pesticides:

7-10_Pesticides__-DPIW-Tas_Rivers_Alison_Bleaney.pdf

Earlier on Tasmanian Times:

Tasmanians Exposed to 77 Dangerous Pesticides on New Australian Toxic Hit List

A list of Australia’s most dangerous pesticides

And,

DOZENS of hazardous pesticides, which are banned in other countries, are used on WA farms.

A report detailing the most “dangerous” chemicals, classified as known or likely to cause cancer, that are stocked and sold in Australia has been released today by the World Wildlife Fund and pollution advisory group National Toxics Network.

More than 80 of the products sprayed on fruits, weeds, vegetables and animals to ward off pests and disease in WA are prohibited in Britain, France and Germany.

According to the WWF, the list includes “17 chemicals that are known, likely or probably carcinogens, and 48 chemicals flagged as having the potential to interfere with hormones”.

“Surely Australian farm workers, wildlife and ecosystems deserve the same level of protection as those in Europe or the US,” WWF spokesman Nick Heath said.

The Federal Government’s Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority says it controls the use of certain chemicals and permits their use only after scientific evidence proves it can be done safely.

Some pesticides, rated hazardous by the WHO, are present in the Swan and Canning river systems, a separate Swan River Trust March 2009 report revealed.

In the past year, more than $1 billion worth of herbicides were sold in Australia and nearly $240 million worth of insecticides.

Nearly $2 billion worth of agricultural and veterinary chemicals were sold in the same period, APVMA records show.

More than 20 of the products available for use on Australian farms were rated either extremely or highly hazardous by WHO.

Pesticides are often as toxic to humans as they are to pests.

Exposure can cause anything from birth defects, respiratory problems, memory disorders and cancer to skin and eye problems, dizziness, headaches, nausea and vomiting.

NTN WA spokeswoman Jane Bremmer has called for an overhaul.

“This is a real issue. Australia has historically been all about reducing the regulatory burden on industry and what gets sold down the line time and time again is human health and the environment,” Ms Bremmer said.

“Australia is not following the lead that the EU and the UK are setting.”

But APVMA responded that agricultural practices differed and conditions in some countries made it impossible for chemicals allowed here to be managed safely elsewhere.

“Australia is not following the lead that the EU and the UK are setting.”

“Australia will only register chemicals where the regulators are satisfied that the chemical can be used safely in Australia,” APVMA public affairs manager Alex Moore said.

“Most people understand that even popular pain medications must be used in accordance with the label instructions that list the conditions under which they can be taken.

“The same applies to registered agricultural chemicals.

“When used in accordance with the label instructions, they have been scientifically proven to be safe and have tangible benefits for agriculture.”

Mr Heath said while Australia may have unique wildlife and different farming conditions, the chemistry of the pesticides remains the same.

“If smoking causes cancer in the US, it will also cause cancer in Australia - it’s the carcinogens that matter not the country,” Mr Heath said.

WWF’s Conservation Policy Officer Juliette King said endosulfan was an example of a chemical widely used here, but banned in more than 60 countries.

In June 2010, the United States Environmental Protection Agency announced it would terminate the use of endosulfan because of unacceptable neurological and reproductive risks to agricultural workers and wildlife.

The APVMA supports the registration of endosulfan.

Its current position is that “on the basis of the available evidence, endosulfan can be used safely in accordance with the conditions.”

The APVMA considers “the endocrine disrupting potential of endosulfan is not a significant risk to public health under the existing management controls and health standards.”


http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/ar ... water-cat/
adminjt
Site Admin
 
Posts: 349
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 2:37 pm

Water companies want to extend no-spray zone

Postby adminjt » Sun Dec 12, 2010 12:42 am

Water companies want to extend no-spray zone
Tuesday, 06 July 2010 14:12 KM News
E-mail Print

Pesticide residues in aquifers early sign of water pollution, water companies fear

The nation’s water companies are calling for increased measures to protect drinking water after a reported 27 percent increase in the use of herbicide Roundup.

Most of the country’s drinking water is pumped unfiltered directly from underwater aquifers to homes and businesses, but as traces of Roundup’s active ingredient, glyphosate, have begun to appear in groundwater close to the surface, representatives from the six largest pumping facilities are proposing to extend the existing 10 metre no-spray zone.

The government has already proposed expanding the zone to 25 metres, but Jens Andersen, of Copenhagen public utility and Københavns Energi, one of the largest waterworks in the country, proposed extending the zone to 300 metres.

‘Our groundwater needs better protection,’ he said. ‘We could do that in a number of ways, but the best way would be to improve the protection of watersheds.’

Alternatively, he said, water companies would need to begin filtering water. ‘But that would require more energy and make water more expensive, so we think that’s a bad idea.’

Experts, however, point out there is still some uncertainty about whether glyphosate ever reaches aquifers.

‘There is evidence to show that it remains higher up in the soil,’ said Walter Brüsch of the Geological Surveyof Denmark and Greenland.

Nevertheless, statistics show that in 2008, traces of glyphosate were found in 2.5 percent of wells dug by water companies. In one half of one percent of cases, the level of glyphosate exceeded acceptable limits.

That compares with 2000, when less than one percent of wells contained traces of glyphosate, and none exceeded acceptable limits.

Agriculture accounted for 92 percent of the estimated 1,500 tonnes of Roundup used in 2008.


JP International

The Tales of Hans Christian Andersen

http://www.cphpost.dk/news/national/88- ... -zone.html
adminjt
Site Admin
 
Posts: 349
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 2:37 pm


Return to Chemical Pesticides / Herbicides

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron