Originally published August 3 2004
EPA cops out on environmental protection from pesticides; allows their fast-track approval as long as somebody thinks they might be safe
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
The Bush administration is proposing new rules that would allow the EPA to avoid determining whether pesticides might harm fish and other wildlife before approving their widespread use. This is one more way the Bush administration continues its assault on the environment. Essentially, it will allow the fast-track approval of all sorts of pesticides regardless of how much harm they might cause to the environment. The Dept. of Interior calls it, "...a more efficient approach."
-
WASHINGTON -- The Environmental Protection Agency will be free to approve pesticides without consulting wildlife agencies to determine if the chemical might harm plants and animals protected by the Endangered Species Act, according to new Bush administration rules.
- The streamlining by the Interior and Commerce departments represents "a more efficient approach to ensure protection of threatened and endangered species," officials with the two agencies, EPA and the Agriculture Department, said in a joint statement yesterday.
- Under the Endangered Species Act, EPA has been required to consult with Interior's Fish and Wildlife Service and Commerce's National Marine Fisheries Service each time it licenses a new pesticide.
- "Because of the complexity of consultations to examine the effects of pest-control products, there have been almost no consultations completed in the past decade," the officials acknowledged in their statement.
- The rulemaking is partly in response to a successful lawsuit against the EPA in Seattle by Washington Toxics Coalition, the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations and other groups.
- They argued that the EPA hadn't consulted with the government's wildlife experts to gauge the risks various pesticides pose to salmon in the Pacific Northwest.
- "The two agencies completed a scientific review of EPA's risk assessment process, and concluded it allows EPA to make accurate assessments of the likely effects of pesticides on threatened and endangered species," said Bill Hogarth, who heads the fisheries service.
- In that case, the wildlife agencies would have final say on whether a species might be harmed by a pesticide.
- By not requiring so many consultations, the officials said it was more likely the ones that matter most would get done.
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml