PALM BEACH POST July 17, 2005
Florida's pesticide inspectors spread thinPalm Beach Post Staff Writer RUSKIN — State inspector Tom Jertberg tracks the use of dangerous pesticides at about 300 sites in Hillsborough County. But that's not all he does. Jertberg, a biologist by training, has a long list of other duties: He collects test samples of fertilizer and plant seeds for sale in Florida and also assures that no unlicensed or out-of-date products are sold. He evaluates management practices by farmers designed to cut pollution of the water table. On occasion, especially following last year's hurricanes, he has helped monitor emergency mosquito spraying. And, he may soon be forced to inspect animal feed to inhibit the spread of mad cow disease. "I'd say 50 to 60 percent of my time I'm busy on something other than pesticide inspections," says Jertberg, 55, an employee of the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Florida employs only 40 such inspectors over its 67 counties, home to more than 40,000 farms and nurseries. Like Jertberg, the other inspectors must dedicate about half their time to other duties — despite the fact that Florida uses more pesticides per acre than any other state. California has about 150 state inspectors investigating misuse of pesticides, as well as dozens of county pesticide investigators. Florida has no county investigators. Some sites go several years without being inspected. For the past two years, Florida has failed to meet federal goals for the worker-protection inspections, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. For that reason, critics of the system say both farm workers and residents in Florida may be more at risk to pesticide injury or illness than their counterparts in any other state. "Having more inspectors, so you inspect more frequently, that certainly would help," Jertberg concedes. But the critics say it is not only the number of inspectors that must change. They accuse the state of conducting inadequate and prejudiced inspections that protect agricultural interests but imperil other Floridians, especially farm workers. The issue of pesticide use and its regulation has intensified recently for several worrisome reasons. Incidents of pesticide "drift" — chemicals sprayed on farms being blown into residential areas — are on the rise. According to news reports, complaints have been voiced in California, North Carolina, Maine, Indiana, Washington and New York, as well as in Florida. And a recent controversial decision by the EPA to allow testing of pesticides on humans has cast doubt on the value of current testing procedures, in which lab animals are typically used. Closer to home, the birth of three children with birth defects, all of whose parents lived in the south Florida farm town of Immokalee and worked in tomato fields for the same company — Ag-Mart/Santa Sweets — has caused alarm among farm workers. Gloria Lopez, newly appointed coordinator for worker protection standards for the state agriculture department, says she also worries. "It makes you wonder how many more there are," she says, referring to possible birth defects among farm worker families.
Critics want surprise inspections A reporter and photographer for The Palm Beach Post recently accompanied Jertberg and Lopez on a "routine inspection" at the Sun City Tree Farm in Ruskin in Hillsborough County. The 120-acre operation produces ornamental trees and citrus trees for sale. The firm employs about 25 workers and uses 47 products, most of which include toxic chemicals, to protect the trees. Hugh Gramling, executive director of the Tampa Bay wholesale growers organization, says that most nurseries and tree farms are inspected for pesticide use every two years. But Eric Tort, co-owner of the Ruskin farm, admitted that it had been about five years since his last inspection. Tort had been advised well in advance that the inspectors would arrive, which is standard practice. "I usually call the week before," says Jertberg. "These are busy people. If you don't call, maybe you won't find them here. You end up making the trip for nothing." Jertberg concedes that some growers may make last-minute fixes when they hear he is coming. "What we want is for them to be in compliance," he says. "If knowing I'm coming forces them to get in compliance, that's not a bad thing." Only when a complaint has been received about a misuse of pesticides, including a possible injury or illness, do inspectors arrive without warning, Jertberg says. But farm worker advocates insist most workers are reluctant to file complaints, even anonymously, for fear of losing their jobs. Critics of the state procedures say that giving growers warning of visits allows them to be in compliance when inspectors arrive, but possibly to operate outside the law the rest of the time. "It is obviously far more effective to arrive unannounced," says attorney Lisa Butler of Florida Rural Services. "The current system only creates the temporary appearance of compliance. Do you want theater or real enforcement?"
Visits entail 70-question checklist During the first stage of his inspection of the tree farm, Jertberg reviews predetermined areas of Tort's operation. For example, Tort's storage shed for pesticides is extremely well-kept, including his "skull and crossbones" chemicals, which are highly toxic. But Lopez says she has seen decidedly different conditions on sudden inspection tours sparked by complaints. "You'll see powder on the floor, and you don't know whether it's pesticide or fertilizer or what," she says. "I don't go into the storage areas unless I have to, and when I do, I wear a mask. Those chemicals are dangerous." In such instances, growers most often receive warnings, not fines, and are given a chance to fix the problem, despite being in violation of long-standing rules. As part of the inspection, Jertberg leads Tort through a 70-question checklist dealing with safety training, use of equipment, protective clothing and paraphernalia, decontamination and emergency medical options. Jertberg also reviews the blue vinyl three-ring binder in which Tort keeps his detailed pesticide application records. Each time a chemical is applied, the grower must complete a chart listing the crop, the active chemical ingredient, who mixed and applied the chemicals, the wind speed and temperature. Also listed is the mandatory "reentry interval" — how long workers must stay out of an area after it has been sprayed and exactly when the reentry interval ended. Tort is the only one in his company licensed to apply the more toxic products — "restricted use pesticides." But the law allows him to designate an employee to actually mix the chemicals and do the spraying, as long as Tort supervises. On many Florida farms, unlicensed individuals do the mixing and spraying, and just how closely they are supervised is unknown. Butler says spraying by unlicensed, untrained individuals is "an obvious gap in the Worker Protection Standards" and potentially dangerous. In this case, employee Jose Chileno, originally from Mexico, did the spraying, but Chileno is not present to answer questions. Jertberg asks Tort whether Chileno was wearing any protective clothing. He hands Tort the application instructions provided by the chemical manufacturer, and Tort simply reads the label's warnings about protective clothing. Jertberg, satisfied, says nothing. In fact, there is no way to know whether any of the information listed on the chart is true. Jertberg concedes that, to a degree, some of the claims and records are based on the honor system. "You have to take their word for it," he says. Interview location debated The second stage of the inspection includes interviews with workers on protection standards. Lopez translates for Jertberg because all the workers are Hispanic. Only six of the state's 40 inspectors speak Spanish, although the great majority of Florida farm workers are Hispanic and speak little or no English. Seven of the workers are interviewed, the first two of whom are found among the trees wearing long aquamarine rubber gloves and tanks on their backs filled with Roundup, a popular herbicide. They are questioned with foreman Raul Macias standing within earshot. Sometimes, foremen have even been asked to translate for investigators, a procedure that has been roundly condemned by critics of the Florida system. "Using such people as translators has been a long-standing problem in these investigations," says Butler. "It influences the outcome. It weakens the state's ability to get truthful testimony and sets up workers for retaliation." After the first two interviews, Lopez tells Jertberg that workers should be interviewed alone, and Macias leaves. But critics of the system say such interviews should never be done at a workplace where workers may be intimidated. Asked why inspectors don't visit workers in their homes, Jertberg says he believes that the information received away from the workplace would not be specific enough to act on. But critics say that inspectors are biased in favor of growers and simply dismiss workers' accounts of pesticide misuse, rather than seriously investigate them. Before she leaves the farm, Lopez hands out cards bearing an 800 number workers can call to complain about conditions on farms. But the 800 number is answered only from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday to Friday, when workers are in the fields. In the end, the main difference between state officials and critics of the system is that the state believes in collaborating with growers. "You can't have a cop on every corner," says Jertberg. "To a degree, the farmers have to want to do what's right. They have to see a benefit for themselves." Jertberg argues that growers don't waste pesticides, especially since some are very expensive. For example, Admire, a common insecticide, costs $600 a gallon. He also says that with a more confrontationalapproach, "people will start trying to hide things." A call for more fines But critics say there is no assurance they don't hide things now. Those critics also believe growers need to be policed when it comes to pesticides. California, for example, issued several million dollars in fines last fiscal year, while Florida levied less than $40,000. "If I'm caught speeding, the Highway Patrol will give me a ticket and I'll be more careful next time," says attorney Tania Galloni, formerly of the Migrant Farmworker Justice Project. "It doesn't work that way in this instance. If they did issue more fines, they could use that money to improve enforcement." Lopez, the new state worker protection expert, supports the current system but says better education and enforcement are needed. "If you are outside this business, you don't understand what a big deal this is," she says, citing possible dangers of the chemicals. She says the Florida legislature needs to supply more money for pesticide monitoring and education, and she believes laws governing pesticides must be written more clearly to make enforcement more feasible. What scares her most is that, because of economic necessity, farm workers will continue to work in unsafe conditions. "You see workers spray (pesticides), and then they walk right into the underbrush they just sprayed, in shorts and short-sleeved shirts," she says in horror. Lopez says she tries to tell as many workers as she can the risks they are taking. "It's something you need to drive into their heads: 'It's dangerous. You could die from it.' "
Changes to make workers safer advocated Palm Beach Post Staff Writer Gloria Lopez, the new coordinator for worker protection in the Florida office of pesticide monitoring, says changes are needed urgently in the ways the state educates agricultural workers and tackles safety problems. Lopez, who began work in February, says her experience visiting the state's farms and nurseries has left her troubled. "Workers are so afraid to say things, and it all falls through the cracks," she says. Because many Florida farm workers are undocumented, "they don't get treated as human beings." Lopez says change must begin in several areas: •Greater communication between the Florida Departments of Agriculture and Health and any other state agencies involved in the lives of farm workers. "They don't talk to each other." •The medical profession must take more responsibility for identifying and reporting possible cases of pesticide illness or injury when they treat farm and nursery workers. Such reports should trigger state investigations. •Growers or agrichemical companies must translate important safety information about dangerous chemicals because often it is Spanish-speaking workers who do the actual pesticide spraying. And growers should ensure that those workers wear the necessary protective gear, or face penalties if they don't. "It should be part of the business plan." •Labor contractors, who often direct the actual work in the fields for growers and have been implicated in instances of pesticide exposure, must be regulated. "If there is a way to control the middleman, we need to find it." •Most important, more resources must be dedicated to education and monitoring. "Workers don't realize how dangerous these chemicals can be. We need to educate them about how to protect themselves. This a serious problem."
|