WASHINGTON, Sept. 5 — The American-financed aerial destruction of coca crops in Colombia meets United States regulatory standards and does not endanger people or the environment, the State Department said today in a report [ Report on Issues Related to the Aerial Eradication of Illicit Coca in Colombia BINLFA Sep02 ] to Congress.
The department's antinarcotics bureau, which oversees the program, concluded that the herbicides used and the manner in which they are applied "do not pose unreasonable risks or adverse effects to humans or the environment."
That determination, which was immediately deplored by some environmental groups, could free money from Congress for an aggressive advance in the effort to eradicate coca at its source. The department has set a goal of killing up to 300,000 acres of coca this year, 30 percent more than last year.
The month-old government of President Álvaro Uribe has given American officials wide latitude in carrying out the spraying, which will involve 18 crop-dusting planes by year's end. But the program, which began in 1994, has been trailed by controversy, both because of the unknown health effects in Colombia and by its failure to curb the overall amount of coca being grown.
Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat and chairman of the appropriations subcommittee that finances the operation, said he would need to study the report before releasing about $17 million needed to buy the herbicide mixture.
Mr. Leahy froze that money in legislation approved earlier this year. The law requires that the State Department certify that the eradication program meets the regulatory controls required in the United States and does not threaten the public's health or the environment.
"There are reports of health problems and food crops destroyed from the fumigation," Mr. Leahy said. "Spraying a toxic chemical over large areas, including where people live and livestock graze, would not be tolerated in our country. We should not be spraying first and asking questions later."
In preparing its report, the State Department was required to consult with the Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency. While Agriculture Secretary Ann M. Veneman reported that the health risk was "minimal," the EPA. was less categorical, and State Department officials refused to say whether they considered the agency's position as positive.
In a review forwarded by Stephen L. Johnson, the assistant administrator, the agency said the main ingredient in the herbicide used in Colombia, glyphosate, known by the trade name Roundup, is widely used in the United States with "no unreasonable adverse effects."
But the EPA. noted that an additive in glyphosate could cause acute eye irritation. In the United States, the agency said, the herbicide is typically sprayed from low-flying helicopters, not planes, and steps should be taken to avoid having it drift away from the target areas.
*****************
September 5, 2002 U.S. Plans to Fumigate in Colombia By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 6:33 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The State Department is planning changes in the chemical mix of a spray used to eradicate coca plants in Colombia because it contains an ingredient that causes eye irritation.
The plan was made public Thursday in a federal report sought by Congress, which asked the administration to determine the safety of the eradication program for humans and the environment.
An examination of the spraying program uncovered no unreasonable risks in either category, said a senior official who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity. The report was a collaboration by the State and Agriculture departments and the Environmental Protection Agency.
Eradication of coca plants in Colombia has been a U.S. goal for more than two years. The aim is to cut cocaine exports to the United States and deny financing to illegal armed groups that profit from the drug trade.
They include two leftist rebel groups and a rightist paramilitary organization.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-VT., chairman of a Senate panel dealing with spending on foreign operations, has been concerned about potential hazards of the fumigation program and is the author of legislative conditions on paying for it.
On Thursday, Leahy declined to take a stand on the study but noted there are reports of health problems and food crops destroyed from the fumigation.
``Spraying a toxic chemical over large areas, including where people live and livestock graze, would not be tolerated in our country,'' Leahy said.
The study contains an Aug. 14 letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell from Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman, who defended the use of glyphosate, the main herbicide in the spraying.
She wrote that glyphosate ``poses minimal health risks to humans and animals, is environmentally benign, and degrades rapidly in soil and water.''
But a memorandum in the report says an inert ingredient in the glyphosate formulation used in Colombia carries the potential for acute eye toxicity, which can cause temporary discomfort.
The report said the EPA concluded that the risks of eye damage are limited to the handlers and mixers of the concentrated formula and not the public at large. A test sponsored by the State Department determined that the spray mixture had a toxicity level of three on a scale of one to four, with one being the most toxic.
A new formulation with lower potential for toxicity was recently approved for use in Colombia. The report said the State Department expects to place an order for the product early this month.
Some people living in areas where spraying occurs have complained of health problems from the fumigation but the Colombian government says it has found no evidence to support such claims.
Colombian officials say the herbicides used by coca growers are more unsafe than glyphosate, which is widely used in the United States.
*****************
U.S. Insists Colombia Coca Spraying Is Safe By REUTERS
Filed at 8:13 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States, accused of risking people's health by spraying herbicide on coca crops in Colombia, believes the chemical it uses is safe but will use a less toxic one to allay concerns, a State Department report said on Thursday.
It published findings of the government's Environmental Protection Agency that acknowledged possible minor symptoms from exposure to the spray and said any spike in such problems was likely to be ``relatively small at most.''
The report also contained a letter from the U.S. Department of Agriculture saying the chemical used -- glyphosate -- was the most commonly-used herbicide, that it posed minimal risks to humans and animals and that it was environmentally benign.
However the report said the EPA found a potential risk of acute eye toxicity with the particular formula used in Colombia, though primarily for those working with it, and recommended another product be used just in case.
The State Department bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement found another formula registered in Colombia in July and widely used elsewhere, the report said. ``INL expects to place an order for the new product early in Sept. 2002.''
U.S. officials said this would push the risk of eye damage from mildly toxic to slightly toxic.
The Bush administration is clearly as determined as ever to continue an aerial eradication program launched in 1994 that has not stopped cocaine flows out of the war-wracked Andean nation, the world's biggest producer of the drug.
``This is an extremely important program and we believe we will see positive results in terms of eradication this year,'' Acting Assistant Secretary of State Paul Simons said.
The U.S. and Colombian governments, allied in a war against a highly lucrative crop that fuels the country's crippling conflict, plan this year to spray 370,000 acres of fields planted with the shrub -- a sharp increase on the 207,000 acres they sprayed last year.
The spraying does not stop poor farmers replanting on the same area and it has had no noticeable impact on overall cocaine production and exports of the drug.
The report resulted from a law pushed through by Senator Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, forcing the administration to certify that the spraying posed no unreasonable health or safety risks to humans or the environment.
This meant that under U.S. law the administration had to deem the chemical safe if it was to keep buying it. On the basis of the report on www.state.gov [ http://www.state.gov/g/inl/rls/rpt/aeicc ] Secretary of State Colin Powell ruled that the standards of the new law were met.
Leahy, in a statement on Thursday after receiving the report late Wednesday, offered no assessment of the lengthy document. But he said further study was needed.
SPRAY FIRST, WORRY LATER?
``There are reports of health problems and food crops destroyed from the fumigation,'' he said. ``Spraying a toxic chemical over large areas, including where people live and livestock graze, would not be tolerated in our country.
``We should not be spraying first and asking questions later. We need to study this carefully, because we do not want to find out later that we caused serious harm to human health or the environment,'' he added.
The EPA said some data suggested the eradication program could have resulted in ``minor skin, eye or respiratory irritation and perhaps headache or other minor symptoms.''
It recommended that health effects should be tracked as it had lacked detailed information on timing, exposure and medical documentation. But it said there was no case of symptoms being confirmed as resulting from the spraying.
It said it had no ecological toxicity data on a substance added in Colombia, Cosmo-Flux 411F, as it was not sold in the United States, but its ingredients had low toxicity.
|
If you have come to this page from an outside location click here to get back to mindfully.org |