THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, September 16, 1994 TAG: 9409160527
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: NORTH CAROLINA
SOURCE: BY TOM FOREMAN JR. ASSOCIATED PRESS
DATELINE: RALEIGH LENGTH: Medium: 83 lines
North Carolina's pesticide regulators need to crack down on violators and seek to achieve a balance on the boards that oversee their use, the North Carolina Center for Public Policy Research says.
The center's study is based on a review of five years of pesticide enforcement records from the state Department of Agriculture, and on a survey of pesticide program administrators in all 50 states and extensive interviews.
Although the study identified strengths within the program, North Carolina lacks in some areas.
``North Carolina's pesticide program is not a laggard compared to other states,'' said Tom Mather, associate editor of Insight, the journal for the center. ``But the program has some significant weaknesses that should be addressed.''
Specifically, the center calls on the state to revise its system for penalizing pesticide violators so that it assesses harsher fines for more serious offenses and repeat offenders.
The state also should take steps to reduce the number of violations by crop dusters, who account for what Mather calls an undue proportion of pesticide violations.
There should be a broader balance of interests on pesticide oversight boards, which are heavily weighted with representatives from agriculture, industry and state government agencies.
John Smith Jr., the Agriculture Department's pesticide administrator, said he appreciates constructive criticism that will lead to improvements. He said either the board or the Legislature could consider the suggestions.
``The department has made a consistent and concerted effort for a number of years to build a pesticide program that serves all the people in this state,'' Smith said. ``A lot of the issues that are raised from a recommendation standpoint, some of them are things we're dealing with already, but obviously, we need to make some improvements in some areas.''
Mather said the center's proposals closely follow recommendations made in 1989 by the Legislative Research Commission's committee on pest control. That study recommended tighter limits on crop dusters and proposed that the state collect data on pesticide usage and sales.
``Some of these changes can be made right away, and really at no expense,'' Mather said in a telephone interview.
The center's review of the agriculture department's pesticide enforcement actions found numerous inconsistencies in the severity of fines and suspensions assessed on violators. These problems are most apparent with the Pesticide Board, which negotiates settlements with violators rather than using a standardized penalty system.
``Such inconsistencies give the impression that penalties are more related to the negotiating skill of violators or their lawyers than the severity of their offenses,'' the report said.
Research also discovered that crop dusters had the highest violation rate among pesticide users. From 1988 to 1992, the dusters were involved in 27 violations per 100 applicators, a rate four time higher than the next highest group, exterminators.
``There's less than 200 registered aerial applicators in the state, yet they account for a much higher number of violations than their numbers would warrant,'' Mather said.
While pilots have blamed their high violation rate on the large amount of land they treat and the strictness of regulations, aerial spraying is also more prone to drift off-site, posing greater hazards to the environment and public health.
Also, of the 34 members of three panels overseeing the state's pesticide program, only two represent environmental or conservation interests outside of state government. The law requires the Pesticide Board to include a member from one of those interests.
``It's up to the governor to appoint members to that board,'' Mather said. ``In that case, it would be as simple as Governor (James B.) Hunt making a new appointment.'' ILLUSTRATION: NORTHEASTERN CROP DUSTERS
GRAPHIC
SOURCE: N.C. Center for Public Policy research, Raleigh, N.C.
Pesticide study.
[For a copy of the graphic, see microfilm for this date.]
by CNB