HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0491.035 2020-2022 Aloha,
I sent this message about 24 hours ago within the noon deadline in the hopes that it
would be received well before today's noon deadline. Unfortunately, I only just got the
following auto-reply that my message failed to reach you (I was missing a digit :/). Can
you please share my original message (below the forward)with all the Councilmembers
and please respectfully ask them to disregard the deadline.
Mahalo for your time and support! COUNTY CLERK
COUNTY of I'I
Best, t) CEI D
Time '1:' m.
Meg
Date NOV6 2021
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: <postmasterahawaiicounty.gov>
Date: Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 4:13 PM
Subject: Undeliverable: Support for Bill 19 (C491) - Testimony for the County's
CLIMATE RESILIENCE & NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Committee on Wed
Nov 17th @ 2PM
To: <lamson(a)hawaii.edu>
Delivery has failed to these recipients or groups:
couciltestimony-@hawaiicounty gov
Your message couldn't be delivered. Despite repeated attempts to contact the
recipient's email system it didn't respond.
Contact the recipient by some other means (by phone, for example) and ask them to tell
their email admin that it appears that their email system isn't accepting connection
requests from your email system. Give them the error details shown below. It's likely
that the recipient's email admin is the only one who can fix this problem.
For more information and tips to fix this issue see this
article: https:/lgo.microsoft.com/fwlink/?Linkld=389361.
---------- Original message ---------
From: Megan Lamson Leatherman
Date: Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 3:49 PM
Subject: Support for Bill 19 (C491) - Testimony for the County's CLIMATE RESILIENCE&
NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Committee on Wed Nov 17th @ 2PM
To: <couciltestimony a@hawaiicounty.gov>
Cc: Rebecca Villegas <Rebecca.Vil I egas @hawai ic ounty.gov>, Kimball, Heather
<heather.kimball@a hawaiicounty.gov>
COMM. NRef. To: OUNWC/
Ref. Date V 1 7 2021
Aloha Chair Villegas,Vice Chair Kimball, and members of the County Committee on Climate
Resilience and Natural Resource Management,
I am sending this letter in FULL SUPPORT of the proposed Bill 91, that would
prohibit the use of any glyphosate-based pesticides at any County Park or
facility. There has been much debate over the years about potential human and environmental
impacts of this type of herbicide,but come to find that some of the studies finding little to no
"damage"were funded by the chemical industry and makers of these products. However,there
is a mounting body of evidence that this is not the case and that glyphosate presents hazards to
both the applicator and to the environment and ecosystems to where it is applied.
Here are a few recent publications from a quick literature search, showing results in both
directions:
- Bruggen et al. (2018): "Environmental and health effects of the herbicide glyphosate"
avail here:hntiti)s://doi.org/lo.lol6/j.scitotenv.2017.10.,'IOC)
- Caiati et al (2020): "The Herbicide Glyphosate and Its Apparently Controversial
Effect on Human Health:An Updated Clinical Perspective" avail here:
https: /doi.Org/10.2174/1871ri,3031 6c 6661 lo1.ci1A16l4
- Meftaul et al. (2020): "Controversies over human health and ecological impacts of
glyphosate: Is it to be banned in modern agriculture?" avail here: https://hh-ra.org/wn-
content/unloads/Meftaul-Controversies-over-human-health-and-ec ndf
Regardless, should we not be using the"precautionary"principle when it comes to
the safety of our island community and ecosystems, and not apply chemical
products until they are proven innocent,versus the other way around? Did we not
learn our lessons with"Silent Spring"and the DDT issues over 50 years ago?!
As a Hawaii Department of Agriculture certified commercial pesticide applicator(for ecological
restoration purposes), I am all too familiar with the importance of reading the labels on all
chemical products. In fact,it's a law. However, not everyone who applies pesticides is following
the labels to the tee, and inactive ingredients in any product are not required to be listed.
For example, I am including a random glyphosate-based pesticide label (RoundUp Pro, a
Monsanto product)with this email and copying some of the warning label here for your info
here below. For one, Glyphosate is listed as the only active ingredient(41% of the product) and
the majority of the composition is "other products" (59%),including surfactants. Only the
dangers of the active ingredients are required to be listed in the labels, even if some of the
inactive ingredients may well be listed on other pesticide MSDS labels.
From Section 3.o Precautionary Statements,the 3.1 Hazards to Humans and Domestic Animals
section notes of all the required PPE(Personal Protective Equipment). These rules require
handles to wear long-sleeved clothing and pants, shoes and socks both. They also instruct
washing of laundry worn during application to be done separately from other clothing with
detergent and hot water and to"discard clothing or absorbent materials that have been
drenched or heavily contaminated with this product's concentrate. Do not reuse them." Does
this sound like something our County workers (and contractors) should be
exposed to? Not to mention their families at home. Furthermore,under the"User Safety
Recommendations"box it notes that users should: "Wash hands before eating, drinking,
chewing gum, using tobacco, or using the toilet" and"Remove clothing immediately if pesticide
gets inside. Then wash thoroughly and put on clean clothing". Also, not all County workers (or
contractors)have the ability to wash hands while on the job at our beach parks and facilities.
In the next section,3.2 Environmental Hazards it instructs applicators "Do not apply directly to
water,to areas where surface water is present or to intertidal areas below the mean high water
mark. Do not contaminate water when cleaning equipment or disposing of equipment
washwaters"which supports the notion that these types of pesticides should absolutely
never be applied near a water body(whether that be an estuary, anchialine pool,
or the ocean),like at a public beach park.
I recognize that this bill is a watered-down version of what we had hoped for in the recent past,
but it's a step in the right direction of ridding our island ecosystems (and communities) of one
more frightening synthetic chemical that is ultimately doing more harm than good.
Mahalo nui for your time and consideration on this matter.
Sincerely,
Megan Lamson Leatherman
Honalo, HI