Sacramento, August 25, 2009
Watch Youtube video of the hearing

Sonoma, August 26, 2009
LBAM hearing sheds no new light
Sonoma News

Watsonville, August 31, 2009
Santa Cruz County crowd criticizes plan to rid state of light brown apple moth
San Jose Mercury News

Oakland, September 1, 2009
Watch Youtube video of the hearing:
PART 1, PART 2, PART 3

August 25, 2009, Sacramento, chaired by
Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez (D-Shafter)

Watch Youtube video of the hearing

In the press:
Scientists: Save the moth, Capital Press
Bug experts: Calif. moth eradication effort wasted, SF Chronicle (AP)

LBAM Pesticide Spray Program Q & A

Didn’t they stop the aerial spray?

The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) announced on June 19, 2008, that it would not aerially spray urban areas for the light brown apple moth (LBAM) at this time but still plans to aerially spray “forested” and “agricultural” areas.  CDFA has not identified where the “forested” and “agricultural” areas are.

Are any pesticide treatments still planned for cities?

Yes. CDFA plans the use of ground sprays or twist ties in cities containing the same pheromone pesticide that was in the aerial spray, and of the pesticides bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) and spinosad, which are used in organic agriculture but not appropriate for residential areas.  The state also plans to use treatments such as “splatting” goo containing synthetic moth pheromone and a dangerous pesticide, permethrin, onto telephone poles and trees to attract and kill LBAM.  Permethrin is a carcinogen and neurotoxin and toxic to bees.  All treatments are planned for public and private property, i.e., in our back yards.

Is it true that CDFA has expanded the program to cover almost the whole state?

Yes.  The program now covers the areas in yellow on the map below, published July 21.  There is no scientific basis for this expansion as LBAM inhabits mild coastal areas and does not reproduce in the temperature extremes of most of the state.

What about the sterile moths they are going to use?

The state plans to release millions of sterile moths from airplanes over residential areas. Introducing such large numbers of predatory insects into the ecosystem poses a whole new set of unknowns and environmental dangers, and is likely to fail.

Has the state investigated the health and environmental damage reported after the Monterey and Santa Cruz LBAM spray in 2007?

Not adequately.  The state issued a report in April 2008 that studied fewer than 10% of the 643 health complaints that were filed and concluded that it was not possible to determine whether the health complaints were linked to the spray.  This report has been repeatedly misrepresented by state officials as showing “no link” between the spray and the illnesses.  Investigators who prepared the report did not contact any of the individuals or physicians who reported illnesses.
On November 4, 2009 while media attention was focused on the presidential election, the CDFA released two reports on the 2007 aerial spray in the Monterey Bay area. The deposition study finds that the product was unevenly applied (exposing clusters of people to much higher concentrations of pesticide than previously claimed), and that on average only 1/4 of the spray hit the ground, the rest drifted over 3 miles. What's more, the results of acute toxicology tests on the pheromone-pesticide reveal that the spray was not as harmless as claimed: one out of 10 lab animals died after skin contact with the product and half the animals showed organ damage. Despite these extremely disconcerting results CDFA maintains that the aerial spray was safe.

Where does this leave us?

• Celebrating the victory of informed citizens who stopped the aerial spray over cities within 6 months of the state’s announcement that the spray would expand to the Bay Area.
• Opposing the entire LBAM program as still unnecessary, unsafe, and unjustified; after 2 years of controversy, the state has not shown any evidence that LBAM will harm state crops or native plants, and each of the state’s claims (e.g., about how long the moth has been here, the number of plants that might be harmed, etc.) has been shown by factual and scientific evidence to be false. 
• Supporting reclassification of LBAM as no longer a quarantinable pest, which would eliminate the reason for the entire treatment program in California and relieve farmers from unfair and unnecessary quarantines.
• Opposing the U.S. LBAM quarantine as unfair to CA farmers. Produce is being imported from New Zealand, where LBAM is established, that CA farmers would not be allowed to ship because CA fields, not just produce shipments themselves, are required to be LBAM free. CA farmers are subject to regular inspections that prevent them from working and in some cases damage their crops so that the produce is unsaleable. If an LBAM larvae is found, whole fields have to be sprayed with pesticide or plowed under, this creates great financial losses for our farmers. Small operations are hardest hit.
• Continuing to ask for written clarification of exactly what the state intends to do, where, and when.
• Recognizing that the LBAM program is one example of a larger problem: large-scale agriculture, which dominates the production of our food supply, and the state and federal bureaucracies that regulate agriculture, are focused on the wrong things.  Spending millions of dollars for dangerous chemical interventions for invasive species is not good for the health of the planet or those who grow and consume food.  The emphasis should be on reforming agriculture to grow in harmony with nature, without the use of chemicals and other industrial interventions such as genetically modified plants.  The next pests for which the state wants to spray are already in the news – Japanese beetles in Merced, citrus psyllid at the CA-Mexico border. LBAM will not be the last pest the state wants to “treat” with chemicals, treating us and our food supply in the process.

What can we do?

• Write to your state legislators urging a move to all-organic agriculture and withdrawal of funding for the LBAM program.
• Write to your federal legislators asking that LBAM be reclassified as no longer a quarantinable pest and that USDA’s mission be refocused on supporting organic agriculture and eliminating chemicals in our food.
• Vote with your food dollars: buy organic directly from farmers, join a local organic CSA (community supported agriculture program), plant organic vegetables in your backyard, support local resolutions, state legislation and ballot initiatives that will be launched over the next year.
• Support groups and organizations of which you are a member in publicly opposing the LBAM spray. 
• Volunteer with your local Stop the Spray group as we continue to work to stop the LBAM program.
• Stay informed: Check this website for updates!