Stop Wildlife Poisoning

We have reported the tragic effects of pesticide poisoning on predators and vultures in Kenya wildlife and through our work we have come to learn that the problem is ocurring across Africa.  Vultures in particular are at risk across the continent.

In Kenya, Tanzania, Namibia, South Africa and Botswana, pesticides containing carbofuran are being used to wipe out vultures. In a single poisoning incident tens of vultures can be killed.  Given that vultures are late maturing animals, that lay only 2 eggs every 4 years, the impact can be catastrophic to local populations.

Vultures poisoned near lake Tagalala in Selous Park Tanzania November 2009

Scientists in Tanzania report that this is the 3rd known incident in the Selous, and there were at least another two in Ruaha in the past 2 years and plus another recent one in Maswa.

In Botswana vultures are targeted by poachers who want to get rid of them because they attract the authorities to their kills. Farmers also lace meat to target hyenas and this often results in vulture kills as well.  So it is no surprise that researchers warn that the vulture is an endangered species and may be extinct in the next half century unless governments make efforts to save it.

In South Africa our colleague Tim Snow of the Endangered Wildlife Trust informs us that Temik which contains Aldicarb, another carbamate based pesticide, is used for targeting vultures and leopards for Muti – traditional healers. It is believed that those who consume the brain of a vulture will gain it’s eyesight and be able to see into the future. The problem is also threatening South African vultures. The use of muti is expected to increase with the 2010 World Cup Football matches in South Africa, because gamblers will try to predict who will win. In this case, vulture brains are the muti. The brains are smoked in the belief that the vultures’ acute vision will be passed to the smoker, giving them foresight.

Namibia: We have just received a report from the Animal Rehabilitation Research and Education Center in Namibia. They confirm that Furadan is also misused against predators there. In northern Namibia poison is used for lions and leopards. In southern Namibia the black-backed jackal is the target species for poison. Many non-target species also die including birds of prey, mostly vultures but also eagles and migrant kites. 

According to internet sources, “FMC and three national growers groups filed a petition in November 2009 with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals challenging EPA’s action to deny an Administrative Hearing. In December 2009, the court denied a request for a stay, granted our request for expedited review, and granted the request of CLA and others to file amicus briefs. Both the EPA and FMC filed briefs and the court heard oral arguments this past Monday, March 22. As is generally the case, the judges did not decide from the bench, and instead will issue their ruling by written opinion. While there is no fixed deadline for publication, we expect a decision within two to five months.”

And, Salem-news.com reports that “Opening arguments were heard in an appeal starting yesterday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that will decide the fate of carbofuran, one of the most toxic pesticides to birds. American Bird Conservancy (ABC) – the nation’s leading bird conservation organization – hopes the judge’s gavel will sound the death knell for this chemical in the United States, which is thought to have caused the deaths of tens of millions of birds since its use began in 1965.

Carbofuran, which is produced by FMC Corp, is an insecticide used to kill pests on corn, soy beans, cotton, potatoes, and other crops. It has already been much restricted, with the most dangerous, granular formulation that was estimated by the EPA to have killed up to three million birds per year (though other estimates suggest up to 90 million birds were killed), banned in 1994 and restricted uses only to the liquid formulation, which is also highly toxic. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) began the process of cancelling all uses in 2006. In an unprecedented move, FMC fought the cancellation, necessitating a protracted Agency hearing process and court battle leading to today’s final appeal”

Well things are hotting up here in Kenya too.

In response to our complaints and reports, the Ministry of Agriculture has created a task force to address the problem of Furadan and our first meeting is tomorrow. At that meeting will be government departments as well as industry and NGO participants. We are hoping  to impress on the stakeholders, the need for a precautionary approach when dealing with pesticides in this country. To date the Ministry of Agriculture and the Pest Control Products Board have been stating that Furadan is a “safe pesticide” and that the “benefits outweigh the harm”.

We do not know what this judgement is based on as we are not aware of any research that proves thisn, or any regular monitoring of howt eh pesticide is being distributed, used, whether proper use is enforced, or monitoring of residues on food crops, impacts on health or environmental.

Based on our own work we know that the labeled instructions are hardly ever implemented due to lack of safety materials (gloves, overalls, boots, face masks, air filters), most farmers do not store this or any pesticide under lock and key, and the pesticides are used in water ways, in irrigation schemes and for elimination of vermin all of which is against the instructions on the label. When people are harmed by this pesticide they do not report to the PCPB  or national Poison board. According to one agrovet and a victim we spoke to, there is no guidance for treatment of pesticide poisoning, they simply advise users to drink water or milk, and eat raw eggs as a remedy.

Though FMC and our government agencies have not exactly been sympathetic about the impacts  of carbofuran on wildlife, I keep reminding our friends that we should not feel so helpless. Our Pesticide control laws are on our side. The Pesticide Control Act allows for the Minister for Agriculture to ban any registered pesticide if new information becomes available; The EPA revocation of carbofuran tolerances in USA constitutes new information and this is something they cannot deny. No country in Africa can afford a Silent Spring, Kenya can be proud to lead the way on saying no to becoming a pesticide dumping ground for pesticides banned in the west.

As Richard Leakey says “If Furadan is not safe enough for use in America, then it’s not safe enough for us to use in Africa”

The problem of pesticide poisoning of predators is not unique to Kenya. All across Africa pesticides are being used as an easy and effective way of killing. A case in point is the recent tragic poisoning of 40 critically endangered vultures in Botswana. Though the pesticide has not been identified, it is extremely potent and took only minute to kill the birds. The tragedy is that these  birds were killed on the edge of the Okovango Swamp. They were the casualty in an attempt to kill lions and hyenas. Despite the heavy  penalties in Botswana the poisoning of wildlife using pesticides is driving vultures to extinction.

Although FMC have removed Fruadan from teh shelves in Kenya,  we are asking our government for a complete ban on Carbofuran to prevent other producers from distributing it, and to make the message crystal clear. We want Agrovets that are storing this and other  unapproved products to know that it is illegal and to enable enforcement officers to take action. To date the Governmetn of Kenya has been mum on the hazards posed by Furadan and carbofuran based pesticides.

So, wherever you are, please keep us in your thoughts and send positive vibrations tomorrow. We will presenting new evidence of the lion deaths near Amboseli as well as the preliminary findings of Martins research in the irrigation schemes.

Keep supporting us, we are confident that we can make progress on this deadly pesticide.

Keep reading this blog for updates

Lake Naivasha surrounded by farms

In recent weeks, thousands of fish have been dying in Lake Naivasha, a world renowned rift valley lake famous for the diversity of birds. Although it is a Ramsar site and should  be protected by national legislation for its global importance, concerns raised by conservationists and local communities about the impacts of developments around the lake have gone unheeded for years. The lake has become a a shrinking stinking cesspool.

Now the Mars group have joined the fray and the media have put the pressure on flowerfarmers. Kenyan farmers cant feed the nation but yet the country is one of the worlds largest producers of cut flowers. In fact cut flowers generate the greatest revenue of all horticutltural exports raking in $405.5 million from export of 87,042 metric tonnes of cut flowers.

Witnesses on the ground claim that flower farmers extract water from the lake, and also dump pesticide laden wastes into the lake which contributes to the receeding shore lines and progressively polluted waters.

The Member of Parliament for Naivasha, Mr. John Muththo has been fighting this issue for many years but to no avail. Now fishing has been banned and water quality tests are being conducted.

According to the Standard Newspapers

“About 40 flower farms http://stopwildlifepoisoning.wildlifedirect.org/wp-admin/post-new.phpring the lake’s shores, drawing water from it and some of them sending back pesticide-laden effluent back to the lake.

Another 20 farms are distributed farther from the lake, using water from boreholes and rivers that affect the lake’s ecosystem.

A recent report appearing in New York Times stated, “Huge flower farms have bought up much of the lakefront, using the water to irrigate their roses and carnations, which are exported to Europe. Some of the farmers introduce banned pesticides into the lake.”

Responding to threats that the flower farms will be closed local growers under the Kenya Flower Council and the Lake Naivasha Growers Group have urged the government to prove the cause of fish deaths. They deny that pesticides could be  the cause as they claim to practice responsible methods through a voluntary social  and environmental codes of practice.

It is a sad day for Kenya when it takes thousands of fish to die in Lake Naivasha to wake up the relevant ministries and agencies to  investigate the impact of unregulated pesticide use and water abstraction.

Working during the holiday season is not a chore when you get to do blogging from the slopes of Mt. Kilimanjaro.

I spent the last few days with Antony Kasanga of Lion Guardians Blog who has been educating his community about the need to protect lions. This season a new generation of young Masai men are being initiated to the Moran, or warrior class. Killing lions has been a tradition to prove their bravery. Now the older moran like Antony are asking the youth to discard that tradition, and to take pride in saving lions. Afterall, conservation gives people like Antony a job and only those with jobs survived the recent drought without much loss. More than 80% of the cattle in the area died during the drought. As their only source of wealth is livestock, this has left many of the Masai destitute.

During a meeting Menye Laiyiok meeting, fathers of the uncircumcised boys prepare their sons for a serious life of adult hood and how to be good warriors.

This meeting held a special message that survival depends on the conservation of wildlife in this area. Without wildlife, especially lions, tourists would not come here. Antony spoke specifically about the need to discard the old ways of poisoning lions with Furadan – a message that some were not happy to hear as it’s an easy way of making a kill and getting rid of this feared predator.

Thank fully people on Mbirikani Ranch have no reason to poach predators because there is a predation compensation fund that enables losses to be recovered at least in part. Reuben Ole Silati is the predator verification officer and is verifying that this goat was actually killed by a hyena.

Dear all,

These are exerpts from an interview between Pierre Mineau and Laura Sevier published in The Ecologist

Reports of mass bird mortality from pesticide use made environmentalist Rachel Carson speak of a ‘silent spring’ in her groundbreaking 1962 book. Forty seven years after the publication of the book, uncounted millions of birds around the world continue to die from the effects of pesticides. The industry still resists regulation and governments are slow to deal with the problem.

Dr Pierre Mineau, a leading expert on pesticide ecotoxicology, conducts research for Canada’s federal department of the environment at the National Wildlife Research Centre in Ottawa.

LS: What’s the most shocking thing you’ve ever seen or heard of in relation to pesticides?

PM: What I find really shocking is when a company does studies that show significant impacts and then continue to market the pesticide around the world. Take granular carbofuran. The first time they did the tests for the EPA they found 799 dead birds of a single species (a lark) in a few fields. Other species were affected also but not in such numbers.

Nevertheless, it took about 15 years for that product to be removed from North America – it continues to be used worldwide. When your profit from selling a pesticide is high enough, it pays to oppose and delay any regulatory change. Every year you delay you’re making millions. My calculation is that every year this product was killing between 17-91 million birds in US maize fields alone.

LS: How do pesticides affect birds – is it through eating contaminated things or through the spray?

PM: In the case of granule formulations or seed treatments, it is clearly ingestion. When it comes to sprays, exposure takes place through several  routes, chief of which appears to be dermal contact from the feet and body. This is not yet acknowledged by regulators who still assume all exposure is dietary. …

There are studies where you manipulate conditions. An American study carried out almost two decades ago paved the way. It was very inventive. Birds were exposed to pesticide sprays in a controlled environment under varying conditions, e.g. some of them wearing little raincoats etc… and various routes isolated. We’ve done some work along those lines and arrive at the same conclusions.

LS: What do you propose should be done? Is it a question of more regulation?

PM: Yes, I think the ball is clearly in the court of the governments. The evidence is there, the replacement chemicals exist. I think it’s a matter of saying: those chemicals – chiefly the organophosphorous and carbamate insecticides – were brought in at the same time as DDT. These 1940s, 50s, 60s, 70s products don’t belong in this millennium. They really don’t.

The problem with that message is that it seems like you have to start all over again in every country because with migratory birds every government has got to follow suit. Then of course the industry will demand that studies be repeated and evidence be amassed in every country. It’s going to take a long time.

There are a few bright lights out there. In the US there was an act (the Food Quality Protection Act) which put the emphasis on children’s exposure. It said for the first time that the compounds which have a similar toxic mode of action should be considered as a group. This led to the removal of many pesticides and pesticide uses and, as a result, the situation has been getting better for birds in the last 10 years or so – but this was in order to reduce the risk to children.

Pierre Mineau: let’s get rid of the pesticides that are killing birds

Laura Sevier

17th December, 2009

Canadian scientist Dr Pierre Mineau talks about the ongoing struggle to protect birds from pesticides that ‘don’t belong in this millennium’

Reports of mass bird mortality from pesticide use made environmentalist Rachel Carson speak of a ‘silent spring’ in her groundbreaking 1962 book.

Forty seven years after the publication of the book, uncounted millions of birds around the world continue to die from the effects of pesticides. The industry still resists regulation and governments are slow to deal with the problem.

Dr Pierre Mineau, a leading expert on pesticide ecotoxicology, conducts research for Canada’s federal department of the environment at the National Wildlife Research Centre in Ottawa.

Laura Sevier: Would you say that birds are still the canary in the coalmine?

Pierre Mineau: Yes, I think that’s a great analogy on several levels. They can be very quick to move in after the fields have been sprayed so they put themselves at risk by being in the wrong place in the wrong time. We judge it’s not safe for people to go back until 14 days even though people are a whole lot bigger and they’re not eating – and then we’re surprised when there are problems when birds fly into these areas. It’s common sense.

LS: What impact did reading Silent Spring have on you?

PM: I’ve read it twice. Having re-read it 8 months ago I was amazed at how many things she got right. Because she was so vilified at the time everyone thought she was making it up… But you know what? She was pretty close to the mark.

LS: Is the threat of a silent spring behind us now?

PM: Well it’s really a different threat. We’ve replaced a lot of the old persistent organochlorine pesticides products with other pesticides. In terms of bringing some species close to the brink – such as the sparrowhawk in Britain from aldrin and dieldrin seed treatments and the pelican and the bald eagle from DDT – the situation isn’t as bad. However when you consider the total loss of bird biomass it’s probably worse today. What’s shifted is that the impact is now on birds lower down the food chain. Although these smaller birds (sparrows and so on) can more easily recover from population losses than a sparrowhawk or eagle.

LS: Is this the case throughout the world?

PM: I would really say it’s throughout the world. You really live in a bit of a bubble in the UK. Because you are a nation of bird lovers, very early on there was a political decision in your country to ban pesticides that cause bird mortality. That had a positive impact on the birds. That was unheard of; the only country where that happened.

The whole Wildlife Incident Investigation Scheme (WIIS) here – that’s unique also in how thorough it is. Compounds known to cause problems were removed from broad use.

A lot of other countries are still struggling with those compounds – whether N. America or parts of southern Europe. Europe is probably cleaning up its compounds faster as a result of the EU. Most of developing countries are still making massive use of these bird-toxic products. The pesticides are off-patent and there are now a number of manufacturers including offshore, cheap Chinese knock-offs. In fact, the use of such compounds appears to be increasing in developing countries of Latin America, Africa, Asia.

LS: What’s the most shocking thing you’ve ever seen or heard of in relation to pesticides?

PM: What I find really shocking is when a company does studies that show significant impacts and then continue to market the pesticide around the world. Take granular carbofuran. The first time they did the tests for the EPA they found 799 dead birds of a single species (a lark) in a few fields. Other species were affected also but not in such numbers.

Nevertheless, it took about 15 years for that product to be removed from North America – it continues to be used worldwide. When your profit from selling a pesticide is high enough, it pays to oppose and delay any regulatory change. Every year you delay you’re making millions. My calculation is that every year this product was killing between 17-91 million birds in US maize fields alone.

LS: How do pesticides affect birds – is it through eating contaminated things or through the spray?

PM: In the case of granule formulations or seed treatments, it is clearly ingestion. When it comes to sprays, exposure takes place through several  routes, chief of which appears to be dermal contact from the feet and body. This is not yet acknowledged by regulators who still assume all exposure is dietary. …

There are studies where you manipulate conditions. An American study carried out almost two decades ago paved the way. It was very inventive. Birds were exposed to pesticide sprays in a controlled environment under varying conditions, e.g. some of them wearing little raincoats etc… and various routes isolated. We’ve done some work along those lines and arrive at the same conclusions.

LS: What do you propose should be done? Is it a question of more regulation?

PM: Yes, I think the ball is clearly in the court of the governments. The evidence is there, the replacement chemicals exist. I think it’s a matter of saying: those chemicals – chiefly the organophosphorous and carbamate insecticides – were brought in at the same time as DDT. These 1940s, 50s, 60s, 70s products don’t belong in this millennium. They really don’t.

The problem with that message is that it seems like you have to start all over again in every country because with migratory birds every government has got to follow suit. Then of course the industry will demand that studies be repeated and evidence be amassed in every country. It’s going to take a long time.

There are a few bright lights out there. In the US there was an act (the Food Quality Protection Act) which put the emphasis on children’s exposure. It said for the first time that the compounds which have a similar toxic mode of action should be considered as a group. This led to the removal of many pesticides and pesticide uses and, as a result, the situation has been getting better for birds in the last 10 years or so – but this was in order to reduce the risk to children.

LS: What about GM crops? How do they affect birds?

PM: For birds, large amounts of insecticide sprays were replaced by BT cotton and BT corn. In the Americas cotton receives 12-15 sprays of extremely toxic insecticides. In terms of acute direct impact on birds the impact of GM crops with built-in insecticide has been positive.

LS: Do you think the ultimate answer is organic?

PM: This is not necessarily always the case. For example, a lot of tillage is not good for birds either. Chemical tillage has been shown to be actually less disruptive to upland-nesting waterfowl.

LS: Can there be such a thing as a bird friendly, chemical-based pesticide though?

Just because they’re chemical-based that does not mean they’re necessarily bad for birds. You have to consider the product’s toxicity and direct and indirect impact on birds on a case by case basis.

LS: So there are alternatives that have lower levels of toxicity?

PM: Yes. It’s quite rare now that we have an agronomic need to use the more toxic products.

LS: What are the obstacles preventing these less toxic pesticides being used more widely?

PM: It’s economics. First of all, pesticides broadly effective against a wide array of pests are economically desirable – even if ecologically more damaging. Also, the price that they sell pesticides at has very little to do with manufacturing costs – it is what the market will bear.

For example new pesticides tend to be more complex and expensive to make. The older style pesticides (like organophosphorus), are more simple and cheaper to make. The research costs have all been paid off so the profit margin is much higher. Hence industry’s desire to keep these products around for as long as possible.

The one thing that changes this is when governments start applying pressure saying: ‘We don’t like this – you have to do more studies to demonstrate safety’. When the studies start to mount then the economics are turned around.

But let’s just start with the obvious. Let’s get rid of those compounds that are killing birds. The indirect impacts are harder to decipher.

LS: Is your work often attacked or dismissed by the chemical industry. in the same way that Rachel Carson’s was?

PM: Oh yes. Years ago they handed out pamphlets to every wheat and canola farmer in Canada to tell them what an irresponsible scientist I was. That my research was wrong…

LS: But it hasn’t stopped you?

PM: Not yet.

You can read the full interview here.

Dear Friends,

We have just heard from the Defenders of Wildlife that the DC Circuit yesterday rejected a request by FMC Corporation, the manufacturer of carbofuran, and several U.S. users of carbofuran, for a stay of EPA’s decision to revoke food tolerances of the deadly pesticide. FMC and some organizations were trying to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from implementing their decision at the end of this year.

This court ruling means that the EPA’s decision to revoke all tolerances of carbofuran will take effect after December 31, 2009.

However it does not affect exports of Furadan – one of the the primary causes of death of lions in Africa.

The Defenders of Wildlife are running their own campaign to ban Carbofuran.

Dear all, this document was freely available on the Kenyan PCPB website but seems to have been removed. I’ve uploaded it for public access here. Most other laws of Kenya are freely available online through various ministries.

Its not just in Kenya, activivists in Thiland have just reported that Carbofuran in Thailand is a major Public Health Risk

In Research on 22/11/2009 at 1:33 pmTo be translated and distributed at the upcoming  ?????????????????????????????????? ???????? 9 (The 9th National Plant Protection Conference)

For background information, please visit our report Turning Crisis Into Opportunity and our first press release

Ubon Ratchatani, Thailand, 23 November 2009 – Following the incident surrounding the plant disease “natural disaster”[1] in Kudchum district, Yasothon province, the AAN has compiled further research to raise public awareness about the impacts of carbofuran (Furadan) on the environment and human health.

The Alternative Agriculture Network – Esan (AAN) is a network of more than 3,000 small-scale farmers, working to develop sustainable agricultural techniques, support local food systems and community livelihoods.  We also monitor agriculture and trade policies at both the domestic and international levels.  The continued promotion of chemical fertilizer and pesticide imports is of major concern to our network, given the Thai government’s spoken commitment to supporting small-scale farmers and organic agriculture.

Carbofuran is a broad spectrum, systemic insecticide that is used on a range of crops, including rice, corn, watermelon, eggplant, and a number of other fruit and vegetable crops.  Thailand imports over ten thousand tons of carbofuran per year. In 2004, Thailand exported to neighboring countries 1,160 tons of insecticides, 1,203 tons of fungicides, and 1,333 tons of herbicides.[2]

Carbofuran is highly toxic and depresses the human nervous system. Pesticide poisonings have stayed at a low level since the late 1990s, but unsafe levels of blood cholinesterase activity (direct result of carbamate chemicals) has doubled from about 15% to 30% by occupation in Thailand.  Farmers are reported to have the highest number of poisonings within 2,342 cases in 2003.[3] The Extension Toxicology Network has found symptoms of carbofuran poisoning to include, “nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, sweating, diarrhea, excessive salivation, weakness, imbalance, blurring of vision, breathing difficulty, increased blood pressure, and incontinence. Death may result at high doses from respiratory system failure associated with carbofuran exposure.”[4]

Canada and the EU have banned carbofuran since 2008.  The United States Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) recently banned its use, finding that “Exposure to the pesticide carbofuran resulting from existing legal uses is unsafe—unsafe for the general population, and particularly unsafe for infants and children.”[5] Carbofuran commonly causes burns on the skin and eyes of farmers, but there is a range of serious impacts on farmer health.  Long-term effects may include permanent damage to both the nervous and reproductive systems.[6]

In a 1998 carbofuran exposure case study by The Centers for Disease Control, 34 cotton farm workers reported nausea, headache, eye irritation, muscle weakness, tearing, vomiting, and salivation.[7] Additionally, thirteen cases of unintentional carbofuran poisoning in farm workers were examined between January 2002 and August 2004.  The patients reported nausea, vomiting, headache, weakness, dizziness and blurred vision.[8] In a 2005 study of pesticide applicators in the United States, it was found that the risk of lung cancer was 3 times higher for those with more than 109 of lifetime exposure to carbofuran than those with less than 9 days of lifetime exposure to the chemical.[9]

Carbofuran poses significant environmental risks.  Because of its long soil half-life (up to 60 days) carbofuran also has a high potential for groundwater contamination and is mobile in sandy and silt loam soils.[10] Compared to other pesticide residues tested in water resources in Fang and Chaiprakan districts, Chiang Mai province, carbamate residues, including carbofuran, were found at the highest levels, between 0.018 and 0.269 micrograms per liter (ug/L).[11]

The use of pesticides also has significant impacts on ecological systems.  Carbofuran pellets often resemble plant seeds commonly eaten by birds and are often applied on newly cultivated soil.  One highly toxic granule can kill a small bird and carbofuran moves up the food chain when birds are eaten by predatory species.  This chemical is also highly toxic to fish, and is believed to be one of the main contributors to the reduction of salmon populations in the northwestern United States.  It is also highly toxic to catfish, a fish commonly consumed in Thailand.  In early 2009, it was reported that carbofuran was being used to poison African lions in Kenya.

Consumers also risk serious health effects from pesticide residues on food and drinking water contamination.  It is our understanding that carbofuran is on the government’s “Dangerous Chemicals Watch List.”  This dangerous agrochemical should be banned in Thailand and Thailand must work to be a leader in regional food safety.  Ending the use of carbofuran will positively address the current public health crisis affecting farmers and ecological systems throughout Thailand.

The Alternative Agriculture Network – Esan (AAN) monitors agricultural and trade policies in order to support and defend the rights of small-scale farmers. The AAN works to develop appropriate and sustainable alternatives for community food security.  For more information about our network, please visit aanesan.wordpress.com or sathai.org

###

Contact:

Bennett Haynes

aanesan.wordpress.com

bennett.haynes@gmail.com

(+66) 867941588

This really good article from Tree hugger explains the benefits of the carbofuran ban in USA

As of the end of the year, one more pesticide will be absent from food crops grown in the United States.

In May the EPA ruled that the current residue limits of the insecticide carbofuran on food crops was too high, and the agency has now decided to fully revoke carbofuran tolerances (more commonly known as residue limits). What this means is no carbofuran residue on a food will be deemed acceptable as of 2010. The move follows in the footsteps of the European Union, which banned carbofuran nearly a year ago. But the U.S. ban isn’t all that surprising–it has, after all, been three years in the making.

What Is Carbofuran?

Carbofuran is a white crystalline solid insecticide used to control nematodes, rootworm, and beetles. It is sprayed on soil and plants, just after the plants emerge from the ground. Carbofuran is used on a number of crops, including alfalfa, rice, grapes, and corn.

While there is no evidence to suggest carbofuran is carcinogenic, the World Health Organization has determined carbofuran a cholinesterase inhibitor, which means it blocks neural transmissions.

The health effects of short-term exposure to carbofuran include headache, sweating, nausea, diarrhea, chest pain, blurred vision anxiety, and muscle weakness, all of which can be reversed, according to the EPA. But the long-term effects are far more serious: permanent damage to the nervous system and the reproductive system.

For the average person who does not work with carbofuran, exposure routes include both residues on foods and drinking water contamination from farm runoff.

Cabrofuran is also a problem for wildlife. Earlier this year, reports emerged that carbofuran is responsible for poisoning of African lions.

The Benefits of Going Carbofuran-Free

The move will minimize risks to agricultural workers and the environment, but it will also improve food safety, says Steve Ownes, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances:

The evidence is clear that carbofuran does not meet today’s rigorous food-safety standards. [The] EPA has carefully evaluated the scientific issues and has provided more than 500 days of public comment on this decision. It is now important to move forward with the needed public health protections, especially for children.

The move also helps keep carbofuran out of fresh water sources, which has been on the EPA radar.

Carbofuran Cancellation Timeline

The move to revoke carbofuran residue limits was a long and careful process that weighed the risks against the benefits of using the insecticide.

In 2006, the EPA identified considerable dietary, occupational, and ecological risks related to the use of carbofuran. The agency decided the risks outweighed the benefits of using the pesticide, and set out to cancel the use of the pesticide.

In January 2008, the EPA submitted a draft Notice of Intent to Cancel use of carbofuran to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Scientific Advisory Panel and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Following review from the FIFRA panel and the USDA, the EPA decided to move forward with canceling the use of carbofuran.

In March 2009, FMC Corporation, which produces carbofuran, voluntarily canceled uses, with the exception of use on field corn, potatoes, pumpkin, sunflowers, pine seedlings, and spinach grown for seed. Artichokes were supposed to be given a two-year phase-out period.

On October 30, 2009, the EPA announced all crops would be subject to the December 31, 2009 deadline for revoking carbofuran tolerances, doing away with previous phase-out plans.

According to an EPA press release, the agency is currently encouraging growers to prepare to switch to “safer pesticides or other environmentally preferable pest control strategies,” adding that carbofuran should not be applied to food crops after the end of the year, in order to comply with the new standards.

Dear friends,

We can confirm the tragic reports of a human death due to carbofuran poisoning. Just today we spoke on phone with the heartbroken father of a child who died of Furadan poisoning. The report of this death first appeared on Kenya’s The Standard newspaper on Friday, 30 October 2009 saying that on Monday, 26 October 2009, the child had mistakenly ingested Furadan and died.

The child’s father informed us that the child died on arrival at the Cherangani Nursing Home in Trans Nzoia East District in western Kenya. The father had bought the pesticide four months ago for use in killing insects in the soil when preparing his vegetable nursery. He says that he was not aware how dangerous the product is and was not informed by the retailer about the first aid approach in case of pesticide ingestion. He gave his child milk and crushed eggs – a method of dealing with poisoning widely used in Africa – instead of water as the label says.

This tragedy could have been avoided – the father, an educated man  (he is a teacher at a local primary school) did not get the impression that this pesticide was deadly. The packaging in kenya does not carry teh universal symbol of death – the skull and crossbones.

Please join us in sending our sincere condolences to the parents of 3 year old Kimutai, and pray that he rests in peace.

We hope that Kimutai did not die in vain and that the Kenyan government takes appropriate action by baning carbofuran in Kenya immediately.