Re: Proposed rule on non indigenous organisms
Sal Schettino (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Tue, 28 Feb 1995 18:54:07 -0800 (PST)
Kathy I'm glad you asked.
you hit the nail on the head. They talk about sustainable ag and fight
against it all the while. The bio-control agents are not the problem
they are the solution. Why make it hard of commerical insectaries. this
could kill off biocontrols. they list biocontrols as pesticides Da.
I'm sorry for giving u guy such a hard time but it seems like the closer
we get to the right way the harder the chemical companys are fighting.
this little thing that APHIS is trying to slide by could cost the
Bio-Control producers over $15 million to get permits to release one new
biocontrol agent . I don't understand why all this bs is happening .
look what they are doing with the Delaney clause . They agree to ban 36
cancer-causing pesticides over 5 years and now they are changing their
minds and saying that they may allow certain uses of materials that only
cause very low incidence of cancer. Da . Kathy you ask what we think . I
think the chemical companys have lots of money and they see the writing
on the wall. and they are smart smart smart about protecting
theirselfs. Now this is just a personal viewpoint of a few of us.
Frist we should never have let them call biological control agents
pesticides now they are taking another step and calling them "plant
pests" . I heard that with these new rules one can ship
centipedes,cockroaches and mosquitoes and let them go anywhere yet it
would be illegal to let beneficial arthropods loose anywhere where they
aren't already happily reproducing. Da. its like organic farming they
put the burden of being an organic farmer on the poor farmer taking a
percent of the farmer moneys just because he says he is organic so that
if you try to farm
organic and you pay for not using chimicals. so it is with this new
USDA-APHIS rule they
put the burden of proof of no negative impact on another low-profit
industry the poor Natural Bio-Control Producers. I think the chemical
people are behind this. they are so smart. I'm working on gettin the
ANBP newsletter posted it has lots to say about the world of regulatory
acronyms OTA,USDA,APHIS,NEPA,BEBEP,BATS,EPA,FIFRA,PPA,etc.Can someone
name any losses from the importation movement or release of beneficial
arthropods. or even one negative effect of th assorted proposed to be
regulated organisms . Da
the Da is California talk . California has a 100 year traditon of using
biological control organisms and appreciates their value in repeatedly
successfully saving California farmers from exotic pest invasions.
What does the State of California know that APHIS does't.
I read that the proposed rules have many elements that are vague and
confusing. In addition vague promises of expanding the exemption lists
leave us concerned about how they are going to be reinterpreted by every
new administrator under every new roung of budget and staffing cuts .
They came after my benificals and call them pesticides next it will be my
cats because they eat mice. Don't these guys know good from bad.
Tue, 28 Feb 1995, Kathy Brunetti wrote:
> The California Department of Pesticde Regulation is developing comments to
> the proposed USDA-APHIS rule on non indigenous organisms published in the
> Federal Register Thursday Jan. 26 (7 CFR Part 335). This rule would
> require permits for importation, interstate movement and release of non
> indigenous organisms. These organisms are defined as "an organism proposed
> for introduction into any area of the United States beyond its established
> range." Listed organisms include insects, fungi, bacteria, plants and
> other organisms. The list includes plant pests as well as benficial
> organisms such as parasites and predators. Comment period closes March 27.
> We are interested in other opinions about this proposal, particularly how
> it might impact the use of beneficial organisms in on-farm IPM programs and
> how it might impact the development and use of microbial organisms as
> pesticdes and as classical biological controls. I will summarize and post
> responses before Msrch 27.
> Kathy Brunetti, Agriculture Program Supervisor
> Department of Pesticide Regulation 1020 N Street Room 161 Sacramento CA 95814
> voice (916) 324-4100 FAX (916) 324-4088 email@example.com
Sal Schettino,Organic Farmer,don't panic eat organic,firstname.lastname@example.org
or check out my homepage: http://www.rain.org/~sals/my.html