Comments on: New Restrictions Ahead For Common Vineyard Pesticides http://reignofterroir.com/2008/11/24/new-restrictions-ahead-for-common-vineyard-pesticides/ Wine Blog Thu, 29 Jul 2010 02:26:46 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Administrator http://reignofterroir.com/2008/11/24/new-restrictions-ahead-for-common-vineyard-pesticides/comment-page-1/#comment-25624 Administrator Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:01:19 +0000 http://reignofterroir.com/2008/11/24/new-restrictions-ahead-for-common-vineyard-pesticides/#comment-25624 Morton, the NOAA finding is the result of a lawsuit largely brought by the sport fishing community. They have witnessed first-hand the rapid decline of salmon and steelhead populations in Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and California. Multiple universities have done water way analyses over the past decades and have determined pesticides to be a major contributing factor. Of course, there are many other reasons for declining fish stocks; dams, water diversion projects, erosion due to logging and urban sprawl, cattle, and, indeed, the meddling of local municipalities, to name but a few negative inputs. Prof. Moyle's massive paper linked in the post provides compelling detail. Whether farmers are "often the easiest targets", I am not quite so sure. The lawsuit, after all, followed upon years of lax enforcement by the EPA precisely because of the strength of the farmer's lobby in D.C. Moreover, the 'farmer' of today bears a very limited resemblance to the farmer of yesteryear. And as to whether organic pesticides are "just as dangerous" to fish, that point is not at issue, as such. The National Marine Fisheries Service has been legally compelled to review, within the next few years, a total of 37 pesticide ingredients originally identified in the lawsuit, a list by no means complete. Perhaps your unnamed 'organic' pesticide ingredients are among them. Lastly, I would agree with you that the biggest culprit in declining fish stocks is fed., state, and local govts. That is exactly why the lawsuit was required. Morton, the NOAA finding is the result of a lawsuit largely brought by the sport fishing community. They have witnessed first-hand the rapid decline of salmon and steelhead populations in Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and California. Multiple universities have done water way analyses over the past decades and have determined pesticides to be a major contributing factor.

Of course, there are many other reasons for declining fish stocks; dams, water diversion projects, erosion due to logging and urban sprawl, cattle, and, indeed, the meddling of local municipalities, to name but a few negative inputs. Prof. Moyle’s massive paper linked in the post provides compelling detail.

Whether farmers are “often the easiest targets”, I am not quite so sure. The lawsuit, after all, followed upon years of lax enforcement by the EPA precisely because of the strength of the farmer’s lobby in D.C. Moreover, the ‘farmer’ of today bears a very limited resemblance to the farmer of yesteryear.

And as to whether organic pesticides are “just as dangerous” to fish, that point is not at issue, as such. The National Marine Fisheries Service has been legally compelled to review, within the next few years, a total of 37 pesticide ingredients originally identified in the lawsuit, a list by no means complete. Perhaps your unnamed ‘organic’ pesticide ingredients are among them.

Lastly, I would agree with you that the biggest culprit in declining fish stocks is fed., state, and local govts. That is exactly why the lawsuit was required.

]]> By: Morton Leslie http://reignofterroir.com/2008/11/24/new-restrictions-ahead-for-common-vineyard-pesticides/comment-page-1/#comment-25613 Morton Leslie Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:24:26 +0000 http://reignofterroir.com/2008/11/24/new-restrictions-ahead-for-common-vineyard-pesticides/#comment-25613 I have taken an interest in a mountain stream that thirty years ago you could observe an occasional steelhead spawning. Today, the stream is barren of steelhead, but alive with crayfish, and several small species of fish. Though the stream is surrounded by vineyards the problem is not pesticide or herbacide drift or runoff, but the local municipality that has obstructed the steelhead migration with modifications to the stream bed. While farming can be a contributing factor, I think farmers are often just the easiest target. Especially likely to be targeted would be effective pesticides, while ignoring the approved "organic" pesticides that are just as dangerous to fish if misused in the watershed. But if you want to look at the biggest culprit in the decline of salmon and other migrating fish look at state, federal, and local governments who create havoc with their policies and make rules for everyone to follow except themselves. And if you want to see a wall of bureaucratic confusion and obstruction try to get any governmental entity to take on a fellow govt. entity to save a fish. I have taken an interest in a mountain stream that thirty years ago you could observe an occasional steelhead spawning. Today, the stream is barren of steelhead, but alive with crayfish, and several small species of fish. Though the stream is surrounded by vineyards the problem is not pesticide or herbacide drift or runoff, but the local municipality that has obstructed the steelhead migration with modifications to the stream bed. While farming can be a contributing factor, I think farmers are often just the easiest target. Especially likely to be targeted would be effective pesticides, while ignoring the approved “organic” pesticides that are just as dangerous to fish if misused in the watershed. But if you want to look at the biggest culprit in the decline of salmon and other migrating fish look at state, federal, and local governments who create havoc with their policies and make rules for everyone to follow except themselves. And if you want to see a wall of bureaucratic confusion and obstruction try to get any governmental entity to take on a fellow govt. entity to save a fish.

]]>