[This blog entry has been cross posted from Toxic Free North Carolina's weblog, Fair Ground, where it was originally posted by Fawn.]

A Task Force convened earlier this year by Governor Mike Easley to address pesticide exposure hazards in agriculture has sent its recommendations to the Governor (read the press release). The report contains some good ideas and some welcome changes, to be sure, but misses the chance to bring much-needed basic workplace protections to farmworkers who face the threat of pesticide exposure on the job.

Within the report's recommendations you'll find budget requests for several of the agencies that were represented on the Task Force, ideas for the expansion of many voluntary and educational programs, and very little reform. Only one of the recommendations brought by farmworker advocates, a provision that would outlaw retaliation against workers who report workplace safety problems, was adopted by the Task Force.

The Task Force faced several challenges in its structure, including the absence of any farmworker representatives. Because the recommendations were made by consensus, any Task Force member was able to prevent recommendations from going forward. One Task Force member in particular, Commissioner of Agriculture Steve Troxler, was extremely effective in preventing the Task Force from taking up several of the reform measures they discussed.

There were some key issues exposed by the Ag-Mart case that the Task Force chose to put off for future study:

• Keep workers' names confidential when they report workplace safety problems.
• Require growers to keep records of compliance with Worker Protection Standards by recording when workers are sent back into the fields after spraying.
• Increase minimal pesticide fines and remove the standard of "willful" violations.

Panelists also recommended solutions including: require crop-specific pesticide safety training; redesign pesticide labels and ensure that they are also provided in Spanish; encourage the use of organic farming, Integrated Pest Management and less-toxic alternatives; improve regulations of pesticide drift; require adequate showers and telephones in employer-provided farmworker housing; screen workers regularly for health impacts; increase the number of bilingual pesticide inspectors, and many others. None of these were mentioned in the final report to the Governor.

Whether Governor Easley and the NC Legislature can look beyond the limitations of this report remains to be seen. But they will have to if they intend to fix the problems that Ag-Mart has so painfully pointed out.

You can download the report (PDF, 232 KB) by clicking this link.

Thought I'd share an editorial in today's News & Observer, reflecting on the most recent developments in the Ag-Mart case (see The Tip of the Injustice Iceberg, Ag-Mart Part II, and It's Not Over Till It's Over).

Yesterday I actually went to meeting of the Governor's Task Force on Pesticides, in support of pesticide safety for farmworkers. Activists in the community are urging this Task Force to require employers to keep accurate pesticide records, ensure the anonymity of workers who wish to file a complaint against their employers, require employers to provide phones and adequate showers for workers' safety, and increase the fine of pesticide violations, as triggered by the Ag-Mart case.

We'll keep you posted as the saga continues...

Ever since I cut red meat out of my diet about six years ago, I'm always fielding the question "so...why don't you eat pork?" Usually, I site environmental reasons attributed to the disposal of hog waste in unsound hog lagoons and sprayfields, as well concerns about hog farms and environmental justice. However, there's much more to it than that. 

North Carolina is the second-largest pork producer state in the United States. According to a recent article from the The Daily Tarheel, the Smithfield Packing Plant in Tar Heel, NC slaughters 32,000 pigs a day. 32,000!!! A day!!! The pork is then shipped all over the world—creating a huge carbon footprint. And as for the thousands upon thousands of workers at the Smithfield Plant and their rights and treatment, well...that's another story.

But there's an emerging trend in the agricultural community: sustainable, local, organic hog farming. These farms offer smaller, more environmentally-sound practices, pasture-raised hogs, less of an impact to surrounding communities (in terms of odor and waste disposal), and, of course, the ability to buy pork locally—supporting communities and reducing ye olde carbon footprint.

The main concern, of course, is that buying local, sustainable pork means paying more up front. Some businesses and schools find it hard to support the organic farms due to these monetary constraints. The good news is that there are groups like NC Choices and FLO Foods to help support local farmers, develop community partnerships, and promote sustainable agriculture. 

The good news (for meat-eaters, at least)? This little piggy went organic and went to market.

I was introduced this week (via the web) to an amazing individual. And, I've been so inspired that I wanted to share this individual -- and her mission -- with you.

Faithful blog readers, let me introduce you to Majora Carter, with Sustainable South Bronx.

Majora was in NC this week giving a speech on Tuesday morning at the Emerging Issues Forum. Just listening to her online, I was blown away. Her content is heavy, but her outlook is so hopeful. She's humble, but knowingly justified in her cause, which is to inspire solutions for environmental injustice.

She speaks very freely and truthfully about growing up in the South Bronx and relates it to communities across the world, including Duplin & Halifax counties here in NC. One of the most truthful lines from Majora's speech on Tuesday is that if things like landfills, power plants, and hog farms...

"were dispersed in every neighborhood, if they located them in rich communities as quickly as they did in poor ones, then our economy would have been clean and green a long time ago. But instead, poor communities are becoming more and more toxic, not less. And in certain zip codes unemployment rates are rising faster then sea levels."

What's different, I think, about Majora is that she then goes on to focus on some of the solutions for the majority of her speech: creating a green economy and green jobs. And, even more specifically about "clean tech job training and placement" for low-income people, which would help get these individuals out of poverty and help green our environment. It's a win-win solution.

To learn more for yourself:
1) Listen to Majora's presentation,
2) Visit the Sustainable South Bronx website, or
3) Check out another one of Majora's projects: Green For All.

And then tell us what you think:
1) Where does North Carolina look first to implement some of Majora's solutions to better our environment and our people?;
2) Who would we need to convince that the solutions that Majora provides are the right ones?;
3) What are our major challenges for achieving the success seen in the Southern Bronx community?; and finally
4) What is one thing you can do today to begin to address the problem of environmental injustice in NC?

If you want to share your thoughts with us more privately, feel free to email me personally.

One of the key issues impacting North Carolinians these days is that of environmental justice. As opposed to water and air quality issues, environmental justice issues haven't seen as much publicity until rather recently. Just last year, however, the legislature decided to form a commission to study environmental justice issues in our state--a great step in the right direction to ensuring that all North Carolinians, regardless of race, ethnicity, or income, are treated fairly and equally when it comes to environmental legislation. But just how far have we really come as a country in solving these issues? According to an article from United Press International, a recent study conducted by the Environmental Justice Resource Center at Clark Atlanta University:

...found more than 5.1 million people of color, including 2.5 million Hispanics or Latinos and 1.8 million blacks, live in neighborhoods with at least one hazardous-waste facility. Overall, more minorities reside near hazardous-waste sites than in 1987.

What's more is that in another study (not published yet), researchers

...found minorities are already present when hazardous waste sites are put in. Although the numbers of people of color and poor increase, these changes had already been set in motion before the facilities were sited.

While having this information can certainly help our states pass effective legislation on environmental justice, we still need legislative champions to support the legislation as well as a federal government that takes environmental justice seriously. And being that just last year the Environmental Protection Agency decided that federal facilities no longer have to report their toxic chemical releases to the Toxic Release Inventory, it's hard to believe environmental justice is an important issue to the administration.

To me--it's all about equal opportunity, fair legislation, and good, sound, environmental decisions based on science (shall I mention the Navy's OLF proposal and the mega-landfills proposed for our state?) Don't we all deserve the chance to live without fear of toxics, without putrid fumes, without declining property values? Don't we deserve to feel comfortable in our own homes--despite our racial, ethnic, and economic backgrounds?

This week the Triangle will get to hear from Tyrone Hayes, a biologist and herpetologist of UC Berkeley, on his experience with frog populations as an indicator for cancer risks from contaminated water sources.  He’ll be speaking at NC Central University on Thursday thanks to a collaborative effort between the Department of Environmental, Earth and Geospatial Sciences at NC Central and PESTed.  He will also be speaking on the UNC Chapel Hill campus on Wednesday. 

In an online bio, Hayes explains that he is currently assessing the affects in frogs that have been exposed to the world’s most common herbicide and contaminant of ground and surface water:  Atrazine.  According to Scorecard: The Pollution Information Website, Atrazine is a potential carcinogen.  Hayes is interested in effective public policies that address environmental and social concerns and is in particular

concerned about the adverse impacts of Atrazine on endangered species and on racial/ethnic minorities. Prostate and breast cancer are two of the top causes of death in Americans age 25-40, but in particular Black and Hispanic Americans are several times more likely to die from these diseases.

His experience in biology, environmental justice, and the environmental impacts of pesticides should provide for a fascinating lecture.  Be sure to attend and let us know how it goes!

PS. Check out your county’s pollution profile in English or in Spanish! 

One of my favorite kinds of environmental projects is a community garden.  Done well, a community garden provides a classic example of a project that address the triple-bottom-line of social justice, environmental and economic sustainability.

Farmworker groups in Sampson county have organized a community garden to address hunger among farmworkers there.  Amazingly, the people who harvest our food often go without food themselves.  Working together on a community garden ensures that these very low-income workers get to eat high-quality foods, builds solidarity among the workers and even provides some extra income, since the workers have developed the project into a market garden.

Student Action with Farmworkers is hosting a “Solidarity Day” and Gardening Tool Drive on February 20th to support this project and benefit farmworkers in NC. You can help by donating gardening tool items, and by organizing your school, church, or workplace to donate items like garden gloves, hand tools, shovels, rakes, sun hats or baseball caps, and white cotton socks.

There are drop-off locations at DesignCorps in Raleigh and at SAF in Durham, but items can be mailed to SAF from anywhere, as long as they arrive by February 20th.  Here's a flyer (pdf) about the project, or check out SAF's web page to learn more (scroll to the bottom). 

Starting this past Wednesday and continuing through tomorrow (Saturday), the National Latino Congreso is holding an extremely significant conference in Los Angeles. Why is it so significant? For many reasons...one reason is that it's the first comprehensive gathering of Latinos in almost 30 years! Another reason why the event is particularly significant is that the agenda includes an entire day to address environmental issues. According to a September 1 article by Inside EPA:

[...] a Los Angeles Latino leader says the environment is becoming a growing issue in the [Latino] community for a number of reasons. "We live in cities so brownfields are an issue, overcrowding, the aging industrial complex, these dramatically affect public health. . . . I hope the congress comes up with a vision of Latino politics for the next generation with a heavy emphasis on environment, community health and stewardship of wild lands."

Included on the agenda of environmental issues are climate change, environmental health (pdf), air and water quality issues, environmental justice, and much more. I am thrilled to see Latino leaders taking such an active part in environmental issues. As the Latino population grows in the United States (and in North Carolina in particular) it is becoming more and more important for this segment of the population to become involved in environmental issues...not only because Latinos (like many non-Latinos) need to be educated on sustainability issues to ensure public health, but also because their support has the potential to play a huge part in future fights on a slew of environmental issues, often directly impacting the thousands upon thousands of Latinos living in areas of low economic prosperity, where, unfortunately, landfills and other environmental hazards often seem to pop up.

As a person who's active in North Carolina's Latino community, I'd like to know what others are thinking about these topics. Are environmental issues important to Latinos in our state? If not, should they be? Is enough being done to educate and incorporate the environmentally-related needs of Latinos statewide and nationwide? If not, who should be taking the lead on this?

I was at a bar the other night and overheard a teacher saying that she hoped Hurricane Ernesto came through Raleigh and dumped enough rain so that she wouldn't have to go to school on Friday. A likely thought to cross folks' minds as the school year gets off to a start.

However, this comment immediately drew me back to the years of Hurricane Fran ('96) and Hurriance Floyd ('99). I was a student during both of these hurricanes and remember being out for a week because of the repurcussions these storms had. And, as I recall, it's nothing to be hopeful for.

Maybe you remember the pictures from Hurricane Floyd's aftermath of floating hogs. Maybe you'll remember the green runoff caused from among other things toxics running off from parking lots. Or the flooded highway 40. Or the communities who are still desperately trying to put their lives back together. Or the floating graves. These are images that will be forever engraved in North Carolinian's minds.

So as the hurricane season intensifies, please be careful what you wish for.

We've told you about Ag-Mart and their awful pesticide practices before, and now the saga continues.  According to the News and Observer, Ag-Mart is attempting to have the charges (including misusing pesticides, endangering workers, and exposing tomato-lovers to toxics) dismissed:

The company's lawyers argued in an administrative law hearing in Raleigh that nearly three-quarters of the 369 violations it was charged with by the state Agriculture Department are based on a misinterpretation of Ag-Mart's records.

And they said that, no matter how many violations the Florida-based company is accused of, the state has no authority to fine more than $500.

The Agriculture Department levied the $184,500 fine, the largest in state history, after the department's pesticide section found Ag-Mart endangered hundreds of tomato pickers by forcing them to work in freshly sprayed fields. The agency also says the company harvested tomatoes too soon after spraying, violating rules designed to keep consumers safe from pesticide residue in their food.

Overall, the case against the company is "lacking in common sense," Mark Ash, a Raleigh lawyer hired by Ag-Mart, told the judge.

I have a sneaking suspicion that this big company is going to be able to weasel their way out of poisoning their workers (and some of us).  How can we stop them?

Tomorrow afternoon I will be on my way to the North Wake Multi-Material Recycling Facility to recycle defunct printers, computer monitors, CPUs, and other electronic waste. While disposing of these items properly is most definitely a practice everyone should be taking part in, we can't forget to look at sustainabilty on the front-side...namely, by purchasing our electronic products from companies that make the environment a priority.

Just last week, Greenpeace released their Guide to Green Electronics, a detailed ranking on the "greenness" of the biggest names in electronics. Why is this important? Greenpeace offers a good explanation:

The ranking is important because the amounts of toxic e-waste is growing everyday and it often ends up dumped in the developing world. Reducing the toxic chemicals in products reduces pollution from old products and makes recycling safer, easier and cheaper. Companies with good recycling schemes help ensure that their products don't end up in the e-waste yards of Asia.

As for the findings, almost all of the producers received a very low ranking on the scale. However, some companies certainly proved more eco-conscious than others. According to Greenpeace:

Ranked on their use of toxic chemicals and electronic waste (e-waste) policies only Dell and Nokia scraped a barely respectable score while Apple, Motorola and Lenovo flunked the test to finish bottom of the class.

Be sure to check out the guide as it includes a lot of information about the ranking criteria, downloadable reports on each company's test results, and related articles.

I'd like to get a pledge from readers...a pledge to not only dispose of our electronics properly, but to purchase our electronics responsibly--by buying from companies who make the environment a priority and by contacting those producers who don't--or who don't make it enough of a priority. If you're with me, click "add comment" below and let me know!

"We don't want your trash no more!"

The citizens of North Carolina are taking a stand and telling it like it is, "We don't want your trash no more!"

Yesterday, in Sandyfield, NC (a rural, predominantly African-American community in Columbus county) nearly 250 individuals from across eastern NC gathered to show their opposition of an incoming landfill. It's a similar story across eastern NC. Communities are fighting "megadumps" and saying "No more dumping on our communities!"

The line up of proposed megadumps in eastern NC:
1) Sandyfield, NC. Oddly enough this landfill would actually sit closer to the town of East Arcadia - so shouldn't the citizens of East Arcadia get a say in the siting of the landfill? They think so, and are taking a strong stand against it!

2) Near Sandyfield is the proposed landfill targeted for the Green Swamp.

3) Another proposed landfill, in Brunswick County (just south of Columbus County), is called the Hugo Neu.

4) Head North on 17 from Wilmington (which is just across the river from the Hugo Neu), jump off on 264 and you'll run through Hyde County where another proposed landfill could sit.

5) If you continued North on 17, you'd end up a stone's throw from another proposed megadump in Camden County - home of the Great Dismal Swamp.

6) and there are a slue of other smaller landfills proposed in numerous counties in NC.

Not only do these landfills make horrible economic sense, are harmful to our environment, and have serious public health concerns, they are also the epitome of environmental racism.

It's time the whole of North Carolina stood up and said, "Hey Hey! Ho Ho! We don't want your trash no more!"

Maybe you noticed this week's theme in our blog? If not, no worries, you can still check it out: “Poverty and the Environment in NC”.

Our theme over the past week was inspired by a recent seven week series on Grist online magazine on poverty and the environment. In closing out the week, some of our staff wanted to share one of their favorite articles from the Grist series:

Grady's pick: Finger-Lickin' Bad

Heather's pick: Ward Up

Nicole's pick: Caste From the Past

Although, he's not on our staff, we thought you might also want to read Grist's interview with Robert Bullard, the "father of environmental justice": Justice in Time.

While our series on "Poverty and the Environment in NC" ends today, the fight doesn't! We hope that this week's blog has inspired you to get more involved in the environmental justice movement in NC. And, if you'd like to do something, check out:

The Anti-Landfill Rally on May 16 in Sandyfield

and

Clean Water Lobby Day on May 24 in Raleigh

This is the first in our weeklong series examining "Poverty & the Environment in North Carolina."  This entry was excerpted from a longer article written by Grady McCallie, policy analyst with the NC Conservation Network.  Click here to read the full article.

The NC Justice Center estimates that fully 33 percent of North Carolina’s working families earn less than a living income.  The percentage of low-income North Carolinians has increased, with the state’s median income falling 6.8 percent since 2000.  Furthermore, poverty is not race-neutral - 38 percent of Hispanics, 32 percent of blacks and 13 percent of whites in North Carolina are poor.

For air pollution, inequitable exposures cut along racial as well as class lines.  Two reports by the national environmental organization Clear the Air, found that 71% of African Americans and Latinos live in counties that violate air quality standards, compared to 58% of whites

One poster issue for the links between poverty, environmental exposure, and health is asthma. Between 10 and 20 percent of children in North Carolina are diagnosed with asthma, along with roughly 7 percent of the adult population.  Multiple theories have been offered to explain what causes asthma, but most boil down to a combination of poor quality housing, bad indoor air quality, and bad neighborhood air quality – all of which are correlated with poverty.  And it’s a vicious circle: asthma can impose a crippling financial burden on families seeking to escape poverty.  

Wealthier families can make daily consumption choices that guard against environmental threats.  Several pieces in the recent Grist series on poverty and the environment tackle this issue from different directions.  Tom Philpott’s I’m Hatin’ It discusses the way federal agricultural and food policy has subsidized unhealthy, low-nutrition foods.    A more controversial article considers the differences between ‘living simply’ as a chic lifestyle choice and struggling to get by in poverty. 

Several upcoming events offer advocates the opportunity to take action in support of environmental justice.  On May 16, local residents are hosting a large rally in East Arcadia, Columbus County, against a municipal solid waste landfill proposed to be sited in a predominantly African-American community.  On May 24, advocates from across the state will gather at the NC General Assembly in Raleigh for Clean Water Lobby Day.   For advocates concerned about the interaction of environmental issues and poverty, we recommend that you bookmark the website for the NC Environmental Justice Network, the coordinating force for groups to work together to promote environmental justice in North Carolina.

Click here to read the full article.

This is the fourth in our weeklong series "Poverty & the Environment in North Carolina." This entry was excerpted from a longer article by Hope Taylor-Guevara, Director of Clean Water for North Carolina based in Asheville. Click here to read the full article.

When Karen Brooks of West Gastonia learned that her drinking water well was contaminated with drycleaning solvents, she and her neighbors had very few options. For most residents, the $2,000 for hooking up to the public water system was beyond reach. Those that did hook up early were stunned to learn that any hookups before official State approval were not eligible for reimbursement. Residents are faced with the possible loss of water service if they can’t pay.

Dozens of times a year, such scenarios play out across North Carolina—because there is no law or regulation that ensures that safe drinking water is a human right for all of us.

As Clean Water for North Carolina has found in working with communities across the state, people with the lowest incomes are the least likely to know of nearby contaminated sites or other possible threats to their water, the least likely to test their private wells or know how to get state or local agencies to help with testing, and the least likely to get access to a safe replacement water supply when contamination is found.

2006 is the year to protect the right to safe water for NC’s vulnerable well-users. There is a productive and affordable solution to this problem that is gathering momentum, and, with help from you and all your NC neighbors who depend on well water, we can make it happen during this year’s legislative session—a bill that would create an Emergency Drinking Water Fund, provide access to testing for current and new wells, and require notification of known contamination problems.

Speak up this year to ensure right to safe drinking water for all North Carolinians, including those who are most vulnerable to environmental injustices of many kinds because they are poor, are communities of color or live in rural areas.

Click here to read the full article.

This is the third in our weeklong series on "Poverty & the Environment in North Carolina."  This entry was excerpted from a longer article by Frank Warren, President of Greene Citizens for Responsible Growth in Greene County, NC.  Click here to read the full article.

Landfills feed on poverty – it is essential for their development.  They are drawn to areas of job loss and low income – as are all environmentally disastrous businesses or endeavors. 

In the late 1990’s Greene County residents formed an organization called Greene Citizens for Responsible Growth (GCRG) to prevent a Regional Municipal Solid Waste Landfill from coming to the county.  GCRG organized across lines of race and class in an effort to stop the dump and protect the environment. 

In a broad sense, the kind of poverty which attracts environmental disasters such as garbage dumps, prisons, chip mills and big-box stores is not just the poverty of ill-clad children, decrepit housing, single parents working to care for their offspring; but poverty of thought, poverty of education, and that poverty of perception which drives people to accumulate things they do not need, often with money they do not have.

Greene County is one of the poorest counties in the state.  Waste Management, billionaire garbage industry from Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, smelled a push-over.  GCRG brought a lawsuit to stop the landfill.  An extended legal battle ensued ... and Waste Management lost the case.

The environmental struggle was far from over, however.  Before GCRG knew what was happening the same three Commissioners that had supported the landfill, “helped us” by locating a 1,000-bed maximum-security prison in a wetlands area.  The county already had two large prisons.  The third one, also, came in the name of economic development. 

Perhaps this is an example of another kind of poverty: the poverty of individual integrity.  What do you think?

Click here to read the full article.

This is the second in our weeklong series examining "Poverty & the Environment in North Carolina."  This entry was excerpted from a longer article by Kathy Knight, the Director of the Area Wide Health Committee, a program of Concerned Citizens of Tillery, in Halifax County, NC.   Click here to read the full article.

So first, let’s get literal with this ... environment is synonymous with surroundings, location, atmosphere, situation.  Poverty is synonymous with shortage, deficiency, scarcity, and lack.

What needs to be understood is that poverty creates its own priorities. Those who would damage the environment are clear about those concepts. That’s why they choose poor communities to bring the destruction to. The community of people who wish to protect the environment need to understand those realities as well.  The thing is, it goes back to the haves and the have nots. What would make one think about air quality in the face of homelessness? Is it relevant to one who has no way to heat water, that the forest is being destroyed?

Many issues around maintaining optimum health are affected by poverty. Has anyone paid attention to where and how low income housing is built? ... Mobile homes generally have carpet throughout and dust mites thrive in carpet. What if your child is diagnosed with allergies to mold and dust mites? Imagine having to pay for allergy medications without health insurance. ... Remember that single adults don’t get Medicaid in NC.  That, my friends, is a situation.

When you plan an event, do you think of what part of the month it is to take place?  When do most folk get paid? ... Then there’s the issue of location. Are you asking people to come to a location that may be uncomfortable to a person with minimal funds? ... Take a little time to learn about people living with poverty. You may find that they like hearty food, don’t feel the need to count calories and carbs at every meal. ... This may sound trivial to some, but cultural competence is more than having a “friend” of another race.

Know that the environment is important, but understand that the situation includes consideration of the lack of funds as well as the shortage of time off. There’s often a poor quality of communication when it comes to poverty and the environment. It will take people from all walks of life to get the work done; we’ve got to act like we know that. I’d love to hear thoughts from others on this.

Click here to read the full article.

Inspired by a recent seven week series on Grist online magazine on poverty and the environment, we will launch a weeklong discussion of the topic “Poverty and the Environment in NC” on our blog starting Monday April 24. Here’s a preview of what’s to come…

Our own Grady McCallie will start things off with an analysis of the link between poverty and environmental issues in North Carolina.  Then three grassroots activists will be adding their thoughts, starting with Kathy Knight, the Director of the Area Wide Health Committee of Concerned Citizens of Tillery.  Kathy offers some clear advice to environmentalists on working with poor communities:

What needs to be understood is that poverty creates its own priorities. Those who would damage the environment are clear about those concepts. That’s why they choose poor communities to bring the destruction to. The community of people who wish to protect the environment need to understand those realities as well.

Frank Warren, President of Greene Citizens for a Responsible Environment, will discuss the effort to fight mega-landfills being proposed in eastern NC:  

Landfills feed on poverty – it is essential for their development.  They are drawn to areas of job loss and low income – as are all environmentally disastrous businesses or endeavors.

And Hope Taylor-Guevara, Director of Clean Water for North Carolina, will discuss how safe drinking water is an issue that especially affects low income communities.

As Clean Water for North Carolina has found in working with communities across the state, people with the lowest incomes are the least likely to know of nearby contaminated sites or other possible threats to their water, the least likely to test their private well or know how to get state or local agencies to help with testing, and the least likely to get access to a safe replacement water supply when contamination is found.

Be sure to tune in next week and add your thoughts to the discussion.  Or feel free to start the discussion now!

You may have seen some of the recent news coverage of the staggering pesticide violations at Ag-Mart tomato farms in NC and FL, and about serious birth defects among farmworkers employed there. Three babies with severe birth defects were all born last year to mothers who worked for Ag-Mart in NC and FL during their pregnancies. At least one of the mothers has filed suit against Ag-Mart, saying the company's misuse of pesticides and mistreatment of its workers caused her son's birth defects, and the NC Department of Public Health is currently investigating possible connections.

This case - whether the birth defects were caused directly by Ag-Mart's negligence or not - is just the tip of a very big iceberg of social and environmental injustice in our agricultural system. Our system relies on the use of thousands of toxic chemicals, pesticides that are known to be eye and skin irritants, respiratory irritants, neurotoxins carcinogens, and/or teratogens (chemicals that cause birth defects). These are applied over hundreds of thousands of acres of cropland in our state each year. From there they run off into our waterways, threaten wildlife, and literally blow in the faces of people who live or work nearby. Farmworkers bear the greatest risk, but their plight remains mostly invisible to the general public.

Let's expose the iceberg, and make sure Ag-Mart doesn't get away with misusing pesticides and abusing their workers. Please consider writing a letter to the editor of your local paper about this important issue - The Pesticide Education Project has compiled links to news stories on this case and other helpful background information. Thank you!

After an extensive analysis, the Associate Press released a very long article with a very short conclusion: low-income and non-white people are more likely to suffer the ill effects of pollution:

An Associated Press analysis of a little-known government research project shows that black Americans are 79 percent more likely than whites to live in neighborhoods where industrial pollution is suspected of posing the greatest health danger.

Residents in neighborhoods with the highest pollution scores also tend to be poorer, less educated and more often unemployed than those elsewhere in the country, AP found.

There's been anecdotal evidence of this phenomenon for years, but this new study provides clear proof.  The data came from the 2000 Census and EPA statistics from the same year. 

Now the question is what should we do about it?