Dear Mr. Helliker,

What is your position on the issue of using safe "alternatives" in schools instead of deadly man-made poisonous chemical pesticides to manage pests such as rats?  How about this rat trap - if a plastic garbage can is filled half-way to the top with water, two inches of oats floated on the surface of the water, and a plank is placed from the ground to the top of the garbage can so the rats can "walk the plank" into the water and drown, does this method of managing the rat population have to be "registered" as a pesticide or as rat trap in the State of California?  Will people be fined  if this method of managing the rat population is used and people are "caught" using it?  Does your state have a "parental notification" law to notify the parents when a school is going to be "pesticided"?

To: "Paul Helliker" <phelliker@cdpr.ca.gov> 
Organization: Get Set, Inc. 
From: "Steve Tvedten" <steve@getipm.com>

Dear Mr. Helliker, I thought you might like to read the following article entitled: Working to prevent poisonous classrooms  

Monday, August 20, 2001

 http://seattlep-i.nwsource.com/local/35807_pesticide20.shtml

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER STAFF AND NEWS SERVICES 

Schools throughout the country are taking steps to curb their use of pesticides in the face of mounting public concern that the chemicals may be harming children's health. 

Washington is one of 30 states that either restrict the use of pesticides in some way or require that parents be notified about pesticide use in their child's school. Washington's law, passed by the Legislature this past session, requires schools to notify parents, guardians and school employees 48 hours before indoor and outdoor pesticide applications.  

The new law covers spraying to control insects, such as ants or cockroaches, as well as weed-control chemicals and herbicides near playgrounds or athletic fields. Many districts in Washington, including Seattle, already provided notification for pesticide use.  

And soon, Congress will debate whether to require notification at all the nation's schools. 

Concern over pesticide use in schools is fueled by an alarming trend in childhood diseases, including dramatic increases in asthma, a 39 percent increase in brain cancer and a 10 percent increase in acute lymphocytic leukemia. 

There is growing evidence that chemicals in the environment, including pesticides, may contribute to some illnesses. 

Children are especially vulnerable to toxic substances. Pound for pound, they eat more food, drink more water and breathe more air than adults, all of which exposes them more heavily to chemicals. Their brains and other organs are still developing, and their bodies are less able to detoxify chemicals. 

There are about 50 types of pesticides commonly used by schools, some of which can cause reproductive problems, neurological problems, kidney and liver damage, and cancer in laboratory animals, according to the National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides. 

Two years ago, the Los Angeles Unified School District -- the nation's second-largest with about 800,000 students -- became the first major school district to ban the use of pesticides in most circumstances. Massachusetts is also phasing out the use of most pesticides in schools. 

Sixteen states require some form of notification to parents about pesticide use in schools. Alabama, Louisiana, New Hampshire, New Jersey and North Carolina have established buffer zones or other restrictions on aerial or ground spraying of pesticides near schools. 

As children begin a new school term in the next few weeks, Congress is set to take up legislation that would require all public schools to formally notify parents about pesticide use three times a year and permit them to sign up for a registry of parents to be notified 24 hours in advance of each application. 

The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J., also would require schools to adopt policies that emphasize non-chemical or less toxic responses to pest problems, such as sealing cracks and using baits and gels instead of sprays, and to reduce children's exposure by requiring that areas be unoccupied for at least 24 hours after pesticides are applied. 

The Senate added the measure to a school money bill. It picked up the support of the pesticide industry after pesticide opponents agreed to drop their effort to bar the use of specific pesticides believed to be the most dangerous to children. 

The amendment is not part of the House version of the education bill, and key House members have vowed to kill it when the two bodies meet to work out differences in the bills. 

The National School Boards Association and the American Association of School Administrators, who oppose the measure, complain that it will cost too much, create unnecessary paperwork and make schools safer for cockroaches, flies, rats and weeds. 

"Congress said they weren't going to pass any more unfunded mandates. This is an unfunded mandate," said Marshall Trammell Jr., a spokesman for the school boards association and chairman of the Chesterfield County School Board in Virginia. 

Only about 1 percent of parents ask to be included in notification registries in school districts where registries are available, according to the pesticide industry. 

Pesticide opponents acknowledge the notification requirements are primarily means to increase public pressure on schools to reduce pesticide use. 

"If we give parents the information and the right to know what their children are exposed to ... it may force parents to become a little more active and demand the principal and school authorities become more conscientious about what is being used and how it's being used," said Nancy Chuda, president of the Children's Health Environmental Coalition. 

"Most parents don't even know their children's classrooms are being sprayed." 

Scientists caution that just because the Environmental Protection Agency registers a pesticide for use doesn't necessarily mean it can't have harmful effects on people. Little or no research has been done on the cumulative, long-term effects of children's exposure to many pesticides, especially exposure to combinations of pesticides. 

"The scientific community isn't even close to understanding what the real effects of being exposed to these mixtures are," said John Wargo, professor of risk analysis and environmental policy at Yale University and author of "Our Children's Toxic Legacy."  

"It's really quite an uncontrolled experiment that we're conducting" on the general population. 

The American Medical Association's Council on Scientific Affairs concluded in a 1997 report that given the "particular uncertainty ... regarding the long-term health effects of low-dose pesticide exposures," it is "prudent" for adults and children to limit their exposure and to "consider the use of the least toxic chemical pesticides or non-chemical alternatives." 

The General Accounting Office reported last year that it could find no credible statistics on how much pesticide is used in the nation's 110,000 public schools, how often students are exposed to toxic chemicals or what the health effects are. 

Last November, 35 elementary school students and teachers in Ventura County, Calif., became ill after a cloud of the pesticide Lorsban drifted into their school from a nearby lemon orchard. 

After more than 30 years on the market, nearly all home and garden use of Lorsban -- also known as Dursban -- was banned by the EPA last year, and new restrictions were imposed on its agricultural use because of evidence the insecticide can be dangerous to children. 

In Ventura County alone there are 92 schools within a quarter of a mile of an agricultural operation. As a result of the incident, the California State Assembly has passed a bill that would give county agricultural commissioners authority to impose conditions on the use of pesticides on farms near schools. The measure is awaiting action in the state Senate. 

Well Mr. Helliker, As long as your policy is to "legally" allow only the use of your "registered" POISONS to "control" pest problems; people will have to continue to use only your "registered" POISONS or learn to live with their pest problems. When will it be "legal" (in your opinion) to use safe and far more effective (unregistered) alternatives to actually control pest problems?

  Respectfully, Stephen L. Tvedten  

Help elect me as your public advocate.  I will continue to fight for the way life should be in New York City because I am the only candidate who knows and cares about how good it can be!

.

Home Page