News & Observer | newsobserver.com | Bugs in the rules

Editorials

Published: Oct 17, 2007 12:00 AM
Modified: Oct 17, 2007 06:33 AM

Bugs in the rules

Story Tools

Advertisements
A strict reading of state pesticide safety rules no doubt is why a state administrative law judge says that Ag-Mart, the giant farm produce company, shouldn't be fined for 352 alleged rules violations. The company had been hit by the state Agriculture Department with 369 charges, for a total fine of nearly $185,000. The remaining 17 violations (and their fines) should stand, Judge Joe Webster ruled.

Workers on Ag-Mart fields, many of them Spanish-speaking women, had complained that the company sprayed fields with dangerous chemicals shortly before or while they were present. Children of some workers were born with birth defects, and because some of the pesticides are known to cause such harm, it's not a stretch to conclude that the workers' labor amid the chemicals was a factor.

Still, that boils down to suspicion. The N.C. Pesticide Board referred the case to the administrative law courts last year, after determining that the situation was too complicated for board members to untangle.

Webster's ruling is a recommendation, and it has merit in some respects. State and federal rules require caution signs on sprayed fields and set periods of times when people aren't allowed back in them. Farmers, regardless of the size of their operations, have to record the chemicals used, when and where. But they aren't required to document where workers go. Ag-Mart workers testified that they were sent to work in poison-laden fields, but without sufficient records, their testimony is considered hearsay.

It's an unfortunate loophole the size of a blue-ribbon pumpkin, betraying workers' welfare, tying the hands of the board and undermining pesticide rules.

The legislature had a chance to repair the breach this spring, by passing House Bill 1818. It would require farmers to document when workers re-enter pesticide-treated fields. State agriculture officials backed the legislation, but it was buried in committee. That's outrageous in a state that relies on agricultural income and ought to be protecting workers' health. Next session, the bill should be passed.

All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be published, broadcast or redistributed in any manner.

Hosting Partners of
newsobserver.com

Member of the
Real Cities Network

A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company