New MIDAS pesticide a touchy issue for worker advocates, scientists

For Florida growers, a new soil fumigant called MIDAS may have the golden touch. But the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s approval of its commercial use in October has farmworker advocates, scientists and environmentalists worried about its touch on humans and the environment.

MIDAS is seen as a replacement for the ozone-depleting methyl bromide, which is being phased out by the Montreal Protocol.

“Is it as good? I don't think it’s as good across the board as methyl bromide. But it is the best alternative right now, at least the way it looks. So that is what we have to go with,” said Tony DiMare, vice president of DiMare Ruskin Inc. and DiMare Homestead Inc., a major tomato grower with operations in Immokalee.

For decades, methyl bromide has been widely used by growers on crops such as tomatoes and strawberries to kill weeds and pests before planting. But supplies of the chemical continue to dwindle. Growers will see a 44 percent reduction in volumes this season, compared to 2005.

Several states already have approved the use of MIDAS, despite safety concerns that have been raised for farmworkers and others living near fields where it might be sprayed.

Iodomethane, also known as methyl iodide, is the main active ingredient in MIDAS. It’s believed by many to be a cancer-causing, mutating agent.

The Japan-based maker of MIDAS, Arysta LifeScience Corp., insists that restrictions on the label and its own rigorous requirements for training will keep the product from hurting humans or the environment.

In Florida, the chemical is still under review for use.

More than a month ago, Arysta submitted a permit application to the Florida Department of Agriculture that if approved would allow its widespread use in growing areas such as Immokalee, Homestead and Plant City.

Terry McElroy, a Department of Agriculture spokesman, said more information has been requested from Arysta on the testing of the product and its impact on “ground water, the environment and human health.”

Some fear the new chemical will be even more hazardous than methyl bromide.

“We want this process, this consideration of this application, to be just as deliberative as possible,” McElroy said. “This would be a major chemical and obviously it’s drawing a lot of scrutiny.”

The information on MIDAS will be presented to the Pesticide Registration Evaluation Committee in December. Members include scientists with the Florida Department of Agriculture, the Florida Department of Health and Florida Department of Environmental Protection.

The application may get another look from a state pesticide review committee, whose members represent growers, farmworkers and environmentalists. Possibly, there could be public workshops, McElroy said.

“Certainly I think it would be safe to say no decision would be made until at least early 2008,” he said.

In a letter to the EPA in late September, more than 50 distinguished scientists urged the agency not to register the product, citing concerns about “cancer hazards,” and “thyroid toxicity, permanent neurological damage and fetal losses in experimental animals” exposed to the chemical.

“Because of methyl iodide’s high volatility and water solubility, broad use of this chemical in agriculture will guarantee substantial releases to air, surface waters and groundwater, and will result in exposures for many people,” the scientists wrote.

In a reply to the letter, an EPA assistant administrator said the analysis for MIDAS was one of the most rigorous the agency has “ever completed on a new pesticide.” He noted that the approval was for a one-year registration. It will be reviewed again in 2008.

The EPA’s review took four years.

On Oct. 25, the EPA administrator received a letter signed by more than 10,000 people demanding that it reverse its decision on methyl iodide.

Despite all the concerns, Shawn Crocker, executive director of the Florida Strawberry Growers Association in Dover, near Plant City, said he believes MIDAS is better for the environment than methyl bromide because it’s a slower-moving gas.

“MIDAS to us is a safe product,” he said. “They’ve tested it to death and they really have no flags.”

The strawberry association has used the fumigant under an experimental use permit on its own farm and it has been effective, he said.

There have been several field tests in Florida, including some in the Naples area, said Mike Allan, global product manager for Arysta. In the state, there have been trials on about 150 acres of crops, including tomatoes.

In some of those trials, there were much higher yields using MIDAS.

Arysta has received approval to use its product in Ohio, Tennessee and Missouri, and hopes to get MIDAS registered in all states, Allan said.

Though growers welcome the possibility of a viable alternative to methyl bromide, one of their major worries is whether it will work as well on a larger scale. And there is a big concern about cost.

Reggie Brown, manager of the Florida Tomato Committee, said MIDAS is likely to cost about 20 percent more an acre than methyl bromide.

For MIDAS, the amount of gas that has to be applied per acre is 20 to 30 percent less, which can help save on cost, said Allan with Arysta.

If the fumigant is approved for use in Florida, Brown said he doesn’t expect to see a big rush to use it immediately. Growers will be reluctant to switch, and take the risk of failure until it’s more proven for larger operations.

“That's kind of like the slab underneath the houses, the fumigation system,’’ Brown said.

Jeannie Economos, pesticide project coordinator for the Farmworker Association of Florida, said her group met with Florida Department of Agriculture representatives recently in Tallahassee to discuss its many concerns about MIDAS, which it believes is more dangerous than methyl bromide.

Among its concerns are how it could harm unborn babies.

A few years ago, some blamed pesticides on birth defects in three babies born to migrant families working for Ag-Mart Product Inc. in Immokalee. But a link was never found after an investigation by the Collier County Health Department.

“The Farmworker Association has been working for years, fighting the use of methyl bromide in Florida because of its harmful effects to the health of the workers and the effects on the environment,” Economos said. “So we were quite taken aback when the EPA went ahead and approved this new supposed alternative to methyl bromide.”

The association has a multitude of documents showing violations of regulations for other pesticides used by growers in Florida, Economos said.

“We feel there is no way to monitor all operations throughout the whole state of Florida to ensure that methyl iodide is always used properly and according to directions,” she said. “Even a minor violation can cause a severe threat to farmworker health.”

Lisa Butler, an attorney for Florida Rural Legal Services in Fort Myers, which has represented migrant farmworkers harmed by pesticides, said the EPA’s approval of MIDAS just doesn’t seem to make sense.

“Our concern is that if we simply move to something that is equally hazardous we will have made no progress,” she said.

Source: naplesnews.com

Publication date: 11/21/2007

respond to this article    print

Receive the daily newsletter in your email for free | Click here

 

<< back | www.freshplaza.com