Protecting Children from Pests and  Pesticides at School. 
Bring the Benefits of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) to Your School! 

 
Does your child go to school in Newton? Become an IPM Ambassador:

• Learn about the principles of pollution prevention and sustainable practices that benefit everyone.

•  Teach the use of brain power and team work instead of toxic chemicals to prevent and control pests such as head lice, mice and cockroaches. 

• Teach others to spot conditions that invite pests and allow them to thrive such as open dumpsters, leaky faucets, clutter and wet trash.

• Encourage collaboration and responsibility among all building users in adopting the good hygiene, sanitation and maintenance practices that keep the school clean and in good repair.

View Massachusetts Children and Families Protection Act - 333 CMR 14.00 [PDF]
The purpose of 333 CMR 14.00 is to promote the implementation of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Techniques and to establish those standards, requirements and procedures necessary to minimize the risk of unreasonable adverse effects on human health and the environment regarding the use of pesticides within a school, daycare center or school age child care program facility. The Children and Families Protection Act went into effect on November 1, 2000. 

Mass.gov School IPM
Find your school's IPM plan.

Ask:

Is the plan up to date? Is it complete? Is it readable?

Does your plan's development and annual evaluation include parents?

Does the school educate and train staff and students?

Does the school implement the plan and inform you about it?

Are posters about the Pest Management Plan posted in classrooms and other high visibility areas?

Do you know how to report conditions that attract or harbor pests? Who is responsible for correcting conditions?

Do you know where reports and service records are kept? Are they accurate? reliable? 

Does the plan create clean, dry, uncluttered, well-managed healthy conditions that keep your children safe from pests and pesticides?

Sue Phelan, GreenCAPE to MDAR 12/3/2013

December 3, 2013

Michael McClean, MDAR

251 Causeway St, Suite 500

Boston, MA 02144

Mr. McClean-

Thank you for returning my call today reporting that NSTAR contractors were spraying in West Barnstable when the wind velocity was over the limit stated on the herbicide labels for Krenite and Escort (3-10 mph). See attached NOAA weather report. While I am relieved you contacted them and “suggested they do something else for the day”, I continue to have concerns over exposures to people or animals that happen to be in the area with no expectation that they will come upon a band of contractors spraying herbicides. They’ve been afforded no warning and there are no signs announcing the spraying before or after this operation to alert anyone to avoid the area.

There was no notice recent enough to be effective in forewarning residents of the area of West Barnstable to avoid this particular right of way which happens to betown-owned land and kettle ponds with an ancient way where many hike or walk their dogs. Regardless of whether a notification had gone out to towns and abutters back in August/September, it should have been re-issued to meet M.G.L. c. 132 B Section 6B (i.e. 21 days before spray and 48 hr newspaper notice). I reminded you of this in our phone conversation of Nov. 18  and you reported that re-notification would not be done. However, the statute states the obligation to notify towns and abutters specifically 21 days prior to the actual application of herbicides as well as 48 hours in the newspaper but the spraying did not commence until November 18.Please clarify by e-mail why there was no re-notification per the statute.

I also recall that during our conversation of Nov. 18, I inquired about the issue of supervision on the rights-of-way during spraying and you stated it was not possible for you or anyone else to be present to oversee the spraying. Over the last weeks, NSTAR contractors have sprayed on several days when wind conditions did not meet the label requirements. It is only happenstance that today’s violation was reported to me along with a videotape as it occurred. It’s not acceptable that citizens need to be ever vigilant to ensure the regulations are enforced--that’s the role of government. The NSTAR Yearly Operational Plan was approved by the MA Department of Agricultural Resources-the agency you work for which is supported with citizen tax dollars- and as Pesticide Inspector, Inspectional Services & Pest Mgt., and Enforcement for VMPs and YOPs, proper implementation, enforcement, or revocation of the YOP is your responsibility. The label violations relating to wind velocity –but possibly others-would likely not have occurred had an inspector been on site. Please make recommendations or adjustments to ensure this doesn’t continue.

Thank you-

Sue Phelan, GreenCAPE

P.O. Box 631

West Barnstable, MA 02668

www.GreenCAPE.org

508.362.5927;508.494.0276

Glyphosate (Roundup): Most Biologically Disruptive Chemical in Our Environment?

Monsanto wants you to believe that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup®, is only “minimally toxic” to humans, whatever that means. But the most recent study on the most widely used herbicide in the world says, once again, otherwise. According to the report: Glyphosate residues found in the main foods of the Western diet – sugar, wheat, and genetically modified corn and soy – inhibit critical enzymes in mammals. Its negative impact on the body is “insidious and manifests slowly over time, as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body.”

Read the study (PDF)

MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (MBTA) RAPID TRANSIT LINES Yearly Operational Plan 2012 
Read the plan:  
http://www.mass.gov/agr/pesticides/rightofway/yop/MBTA-2012-YOP.pdf

This Yearly Operational Plan (YOP) describes the vegetation management operations for the Railroad’s rights-of-way scheduled for vegetation maintenance during this calendar year in compliance with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Rights-of-Way Management Regulations 333 CMR 11.00.

This YOP is a companion document to the Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) which has been approved by the Department of Agricultural Resources.

MUNICIPALITIES WHERE TREATMENT WILL BE MADE
Boston
Braintree
Brookline
Cambridge
Malden
Medford
Milton
Newton
Quincy
Revere
Somerville

Herbicides 
Razor-Pro
Oust Extra
Escort

Rights of Way Vegetation Management Contacts:

• Hotze Wijnja (Sensitive Area Materials List) at hotze.wijnja@state.ma.us - 617-626-1771
• Mike McClean (Enforcement, VMPs YOPs) at michael.mcclean@state.ma.us - 617-626-1781

Healthy Communities Conference, March 30-31 in New Haven, CT. Join researchers, authors, beekeepers, organic business leaders, elected officials, activists, and others to discuss the latest pesticide science, policy solutions, and grassroots action.

Herbicides in Purgatory Cove?

DCR has just filed a NOI to use mechanical removal, hand-harvesting, and herbicides to remove vegetation from the Purgatory Cove.  They have also file in Waltham.  

The hearing in Newton will be held at City Hall, Room 209, on March 22.

2012 - Yearly Operational Plans http://www.mass.gov/agr/pesticides/rightofway/plans.htm

45 day comment period starts February 22, 2012.

City of Haverhill YOP [PDF]

• City of Haverhill Environmental Notice

Holyoke Gas & Electric [PDF]

• Holyoke Gas & Electric Environmental Monitor Notice

Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company [PDF]

• Mass. Municipal Wholesale Electric Co. Environmental Monitor Notice

National Grid [PDF]

• National Grid Environmental Monitor Notice

Northeast Utilities [PDF]

• Northeast Utilities Environmental Monitor Notice

NSTAR [PDF]

• NSTAR Environmental Monitor Notice

Ponds in Peril - Again.  The way to reduce vegetation overgrowth is to protect the watershed from fertilizers and pesticides that run off into the Cove. EG
Article form Newton PATCH:

Improvements Coming to Purgatory Cove in Newton/Waltham

Purgatory Cove in Waltham and Newton to have vegetation removed.

• By Ryan Grannan-Doll February 15, 2012

If all goes according to plan, Purgatory Cove on the Waltham/Newton line will be rid of overgrown vegetation by this summer.

The state Department of Conservation and Recreation plans to start removing the vegetation at the cove this coming May, according to Waltham City Councilor Stephen Rourke. DCR officials will to monitor the cove, which connects to Auburndale Cove, over the next several years and possibly perform chemical treatments. Hopefully, the work will open the cove for boating and fishing again, Rourke said.

An informational meeting will be held in Waltham tonight at 6:30 p.m. to present the project to neighborhood residents. The meeting will be held at the Hovey House Apartments at 315 Crescent St., Waltham. Parking is available on Woerd Avenue or on the DCR boat launch.

The vegetation has overrun the cove over the past several years making it unavailable for boating and fishing, according to Rourke.

“Over the past couple decades ... it has gotten more and more vegetated to the point now where there is no open water,” Rourke told Patch. “If you leave nature to run its course, over time it would become a swamp and eventually a meadow.”

The water became stagnant over time, partly because a stream that used to flow from the former Newton landfill on Rumford Avenue was cut off from the cove, Rourke said.

If chemical treatments are proposed, Rourke said officials would need to get the proper permits from both Newton and Waltham before performing any treatments.

The work has been “a long time coming,” Rourke said. For the past several years, officials and residents have asked DCR for assistance, even submitting petitions, according to Rourke. No funding, however, was available, until now.

Last fall, Step Rep. John Lawn, D-Watertown, toured the area and agreed to push for funding for the project, which resulted in the creation of the recent plans, Rourke said.

Bare Shoulders: Herbicide Along the Highway

Highway departments across the nation put time, energy and resources into maintaining the side of the road, often preferring to keep it clean and clear of plants. But, as Living on Earth’s Ingrid Lobet reports, in Oregon, some residents don’t want chemicals used to keep the highway shoulders bare.

Week of January 20, 2012 stream/download this segment as an MP3 file

Canadian court orders review of Roundup toxicity to amphibians
http://www.safelawns.org/blog/index.php/2011/11/canadian-judge-orders-review-of-roundups-impact-on-frogs/

Don't Spray 'Em, Outsmart 'Em! by Ellie Goldberg

PEST CONTROL (The OLD way.)

1. Relies on poisons (insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, rodenticides).

2. Ignores the source of pest problems. (Allows conditions to get worse.)

3. Kills off beneficial plants and insects.

4. Pollutes water, soil, food and air and contaminates buildings and landscapes.

5. Harms people, pets and wildlife.

IPM (INTELLIGENCE, PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT)

1. Relies on a plan. (Don't spray 'em, outsmart 'em!)

2. Prevents and corrects the source of pest problems. (Improves conditions.)

3. Protects soil fertility and bio-diversity.

4. Protects the quality of water, soil, food and air. (Enhances the quality of buildings and landscapes.)

5. Protects the health and the safety of our families and community.

RoundUp RoundUp everywhere...  http://www.panna.org/
Like many people, I once believed in the safety of RoundUp. Back in the 1980s when I was a young graduate student in ecology, it was the “safe” herbicide of choice for clearing weeds from study plots.

Monsanto would like us to continue to believe their flagship product is safe, but the data are increasingly saying otherwise. The latest? Widespread exposure is a near certainty, since RoundUp — now linked to birth defects — shows up regularly in our water and air.zRead more »

U.S. researchers find Roundup chemical in water, air

Report: Roundup is Everywhere in Air, Water | Safelawns Daily Post and Q&A Blog

Update on OUST... Lessons learned?   Out is one of the chemicals used in the Massachusetts Rights of Way Vegetation Management Plans.  The problem with these ROW plans is that the herbicide fact sheets the companies and state agencies use are out of date.  Current research (and law suits) repeatedly  show that the chemicals are more toxic and cause more damage than previously understood.

PAN Blog  http://www.panna.org/blog

Last week's action by EPA and the pending lawsuits — with billions in potential liability — come on the heels of Dupont's losses in a lawsuit around damage caused by the company's herbicide Oust. Another longlasting, water-soluble herbicide (active ingredient: sulfometuron methyl), Oust was used by the Bureau of Land Management back in 2001 to control invasive weeds on more than 30,000 acres of public rangeland in Idaho. (See below.)

 Tree-killing herbicide pulled from market  Mon, 2011-08-22  

Dupont's new systemic herbicides, designed to keep turf grass free of troublesome weeds, seem to pose little direct danger to human health. But it turns out they do kill trees.
 
After receiving more than 7,000 reports of damaged or killed trees in states throughout the midwest, last week EPA ordered Dupont to immediately "halt the sale, use or distribution" of the company's herbicide Imprelis.

EPA approved conditional registration of Imprelis in August 2010. New York and California chose not to register the herbicide because tests showed it failed to bind with soil, "raising a red flag for potentially contaminating groundwater and damaging non-target plants," according to BioCycle Magazine.

BioCycle also reports that a national law firm has organized a class action lawsuit targeting Dupont on behalf of homeowners in Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Iowa, and Minnesota whose trees have been damaged or killed. Plans are underway for additional legal actions in Wisconsin, Illinois, Kansas and South Dakota.

Norway spruce and white pine appear to be particularly susceptible to harm from the longlasting herbicide.

Imprelis is one of dozens of Dupont products with the active ingredient aminocyclopyrachlor, most designed for use on turf grass or roadside brush control. All other products in this family, including the herbicides Perspective, Plainview, Streamline and Viewpoint, are still on the market.

 

Growing trouble with herbicides

Last week's action by EPA and the pending lawsuits — with billions in potential liability — come on the heels of Dupont's losses in a lawsuit around damage caused by the company's herbicide Oust. Another longlasting, water-soluble herbicide (active ingredient: sulfometuron methyl), Oust was used by the Bureau of Land Management back in 2001 to control invasive weeds on more than 30,000 acres of public rangeland in Idaho.

 

When the wind came, the herbicide was carried in dust onto more than 100 neighboring farms. Sugar beets wilted, corn was stunted and potatoes died; after years of crop failure, farmers suffered millions in losses, and some lost their land to creditors.

One of the attorneys in the case described the herbicide as "very potent," known to hurt crops in concentrations as low as parts-per-trillion.

In a 2009 trial involving just 4 of the 118 farmers who have filed suit, a jury ordered Dupont to pay $17.8 million in damages, finding the company "responsible for selling a product that was defective, unreasonably dangerous and lacking adequate warnings" according to coverage in the MagicValley Times-News.

Dupont has appealed the ruling, and the 114 other cases remain to be heard. Between dying trees and damaged crops, Dupont's herbicides seem to be keeping the company lawyers very busy.

Learn about Piperonyl Butoxide (PBO)
...because it is an ingredient in many of the products in the vegetation management plans by MBTA, DCR, CSX and DOT on Greenline tracks, parkways, railroad and turnpike and products sold for landscaping and mosquito control.

Roundup-Pro or Razor-Pro, alone or in combination with Arsenal, Escort XP, Oust Extra or Oust XP.  (MGL c. 132B sec. 6B)

Beyond Pesticides Rating: Toxic

Piperonyl butoxide, or PBO as it is most often called, is a pesticide synergist. A synergist is another chemical that is added to a pesticide product, in addition to the active and inert ingredients, to increase the potency of the active ingredient. While the increased potency make the pesticides more deadly to their targets, synergists may also compromise the detoxifying mechanisms of non-target species, including humans. A typical pesticide product contains 5-20 times more synergist than active ingredient. Many products from repellants and pediculicides (lice killers) to foggers and garden sprays contain synergists. Formulations of permethrin, resmethrin and sumithrin, including ScourgeTM and AnvilTM, used along the for mosquito control to combat the West Nile Virus, commonly contain the synergist PBO. Prethroids, pyrethrins, rotenone and carbamates are the pesticides most often formulated in combination with PBO (Gosselin et al., 1984). 

Health Effects

PBO affects humans by inhibiting important liver enzymes responsible for breakdown of some toxins, including the active ingredients of pesticides. Specifically, it has been shown to inhibit hepatic microsomal oxidase enzymes in laboratory rodents and interfere in humans. Because these enzymes act to detoxify many drugs and other chemicals, a heavy exposure to an insecticidal synergist may make a person temporarily vulnerable to a variety of toxic insults that would normally be easily tolerated (Gosselin et al., 1984). In addition to the symptoms induced by the active ingredients, signs of PBO poisoning include anorexia, vomiting, diarrhea, intestinal inflammation, pulmonary hemorrhage and perhaps mild central nervous system depression. Repeated contact may cause slight skin irritation. Chronic toxicity studies have shown increased liver weights, even at the lowest doses, 30 mg/kg/day. Animal studies have shown hepatocellular carcinomas, even treatments as low as 1.2% (Takahashi et al., 1994). EPA considers PBO to be a class C possible human carcinogen.

PBO in the Environment
PBO is moderately toxic to most amphibians, crustaceans, fish and other aquatic organisms. However, study published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service found piperonyl butoxide to be very highly toxic to bluegills and aquatic sowbugs (Johnson, 1980). Very little is known about the persistence of PBO in the environment.

References:
Gosselin, R.E. 1984. Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products. Williams and Wilkins. Baltimore, MD.
Johnson,W.W. and M.T.Finley Handbook of Acute Toxicity of Chemicals to Fish and Aquatic Invertebrates, Resource Publication 137, Fish Wildlife Service, U.S.D.I., Washington, D.C. 1980
Takahashi, O., et al., 1994. “Chronic toxicity studies of piperonyl butoxide in F344 rats: induction of hepatocellular carcinoma.” Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 22:293-303.

Newton Herbicide Notification List UPDATE 8 8 2011

Newton Herbicide Notification List UPDATE 8 8 2011

Update Addendum. 

Notice: rec'd 8/8/2011  3:40 pm MA Dept. of Transporation Herbicide Application Notice for I-90, Published in the Boston Herald, June 5, 2011

 Herbicide Notification Update  August 8, 2011

Let me know if you would like to be taken off this list or if you get duplicate emails.  Feel free to forward to friends and neighbors. Questions? Call Ellie 617-965-9637,  Green Decade 617-965-1995  Don't Spray 'em. Outsmart 'em.

1 )  Do you see any "sensitive area" flags or markers on the MBTA, Railroad, Turnpike or roadways, parkways, sidewalks or trails in Newton or surrounding towns?  Please take photos and send them to me.  See marker descriptions below.* 

2 )  No spray

Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation: DCR- Division of Urban Parks [PDF]

At the Newton Conservation Commission meeting on July 28, Environmental Planner Anne Phelps did not approve DCR's maps. They did not show sufficient detail to identify sensitive areas. Phelps asked for better maps.  Therefore Newton did not approve DCR's plan to apply herbicides this year, 2011, to Hammond Pond-Lost Pond PKWY, Saw Mill Brook Area, Quinobequin Rd, Charles River Reservation.

MBTA: MBTA - Vegetation Management Plan (2011-2015) [PDF]

According to John McNally, Newton Department of Health, the MBTA will not apply herbicides on the Greenline in 2011. 

3 ) I am still trying to find a find out about:

CSX: CSX Transportation Inc. [PDF]

According to the 2011 plan, "CSX intends to commence initial application of herbicides on June 6, 2011. Application in an area may be delayed by rain or windy conditions. Application will conclude on or before July 1, 2011. Any touch-up spraying that may be required will commence after

August 1, 2011 and will conclude by August 31, 2011."

CSX operates over and maintains nearly 670 miles of railroad track and maintains nearly 530 public and private grade crossings in Massachusetts.

3a)  8 9 2011:  According to Linda S. Smith, Environmental Analyst with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Highway Division, I-90 has already been sprayed.

I-90 in Newton was sprayed on 7/28 and 8/3.

Did anyone see this notice in the Boston Herald?   See Notice:  MA Dept. of Transporation Herbicide Application Notice for I-90, Published in the Boston Herald, June 5, 2011 .  MASSDOT HIGHWAY DIVISION DISTRICT 6 (includes Turnpike (I-90) from Boston to Weston.)  
MassDOT District 6 - Vegetation Management Plan (2011 - 2015) [PDF]

Linda Smith also said that a notice was published July 31 for the MA DOT herbicide application for I-95 for other towns but not in Newton.

4)  * Marker Descriptions * Different agencies use different systems.

According to the CSX plan:

Sensitive areas, no-spray areas, limited-spray areas, and non-sensitive areas will be marked at their boundaries with permanent color-coded markers by one or any combination of the following:

• color-coded signs attached to posts

• color-coded signs attached to the railroad ties

• color-coded painted rail sections and/or ties

Sensitive areas and non-sensitive areas will be designated by the following color-codes:

• white: non-sensitive areas

• blue: sensitive area in which a minimum of 12 months shall elapse between herbicide applications

• double or dark blue: sensitive areas in which a minimum of 24 months shall elapse between herbicide applications.

• yellow: no spray zone

According to the DCR vegetation management plan:

• Prior to the commencement of herbicide application operations, DCR will place yellow painted arrows that point towards a “no spray” zone on streets curbs or sidewalks as necessary, yellow arrows on stakes for dirt trials.

• DCR will deploy a qualified point person to assist in identification. For applications using a vehicle a single orange traffic cone will be placed by the yellow arrow to signify where to stop the herbicide treatment. Two cones will be placed at the next yellow arrow to signify where treatment can be re-started.

According to the MA DOT plan:

For the purpose of identification, sensitive areas are separated into two categories: areas that are and are not readily identifiable in the field.

Sensitive Areas that are readily identifiable in the field include surface waters, wetlands, rivers, and agricultural and inhabited areas. Sensitive areas that are not readily identifiable in the field include public groundwater supplies, public surface water supplies, and private water supplies.

For guardrail, curb and barrier spray, the following field markers shall be used: NO-SPRAY limits shall be indicated using RED signs at either end of the limits; SPRAY limits shall be GREEN.

For invasive species treatment areas, spray limits will be flagged the using painted wood survey stakes, or landscape flags. ORANGE stakes will indicate limits of Spray area.