MAJOR WIN!!! Syngenta Not Exempt From Hawaiʻi’s Environmental Review Laws
Good news! In a major victory for environmental protection and community rights, the Hawai‘i Supreme Court this week ruled that the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) must prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) for seed research operations on state conservation land in Mānā, Kaua‘i. Just over a year ago the Intermediate Court of Appeals came to a similar determination, however the decision was appealed and therefore sent to the Hawai’i Supreme Court for a final ruling.
A hui of Kauaʻi community groups including HAPA, Surfrider Foundation, Ke Kauhulu O Mānā, Koholā Leo, and Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners, including West Kauaʻi resident, Punohu Kekaualua, filed suit against the DLNR and Syngenta in 2017 challenging the DLNR's exemption of Syngenta's use of Mānā lands for its seed operation from required environmental review. Of particular concern to the groups was the heavy application of restricted use pesticides on the sensitive, coastal, public-owned lands zoned for conservation.
Community members have long been concerned about the potential health impacts of the agrochemical industry due to the large footprint this industry occupies, especially on the westside of Kauaʻi. West Kauaʻi resident and fellow plaintiff Punohu Kekaualua states:
“Our lands have been abused and poisoned by these corporate entities. In return, our offspring are born with defects found in abnormal chromosomal microarray results. I, Punohu Kekaualua, am a father of 5 beautifully unique children who have been dealt an unfair hand of medical & mental health challenges. Our keiki are faced with a lifetime of obstacles due to environmental exposures.”
Public parcel under consideration in Mānā, West Kauaʻi
The agrochemical industry’s practices in Hawaiʻi have largely evaded any meaningful environmental assessment. The parcel under consideration in this lawsuit represents just a small fraction of the pesticide use along the coastal Mānā plain in West Kauaʻi. Of the approximately 13k acres of public trust agricultural lands under the purview of the Agribusiness Development Corporation (ADC) adjacent to this public parcel, the majority of lands leased are occupied by agrochemical tenants. This is the largest concentration of agrochemical fields in Hawaiʻi. Therefore, the breadth of agrochemical tenants along a sensitive coastal area raises valid concerns about the potential for off-target pesticide drift or run-off from nearby test fields into nearshore fisheries and recreational areas such as Mānā Drag Strip and Polihale State Park. In fact, the Mānā Drag strip, partially located on the same parcel, is less than 250 feet from where RUP’s are applied. The parcel under consideration is also less than 400 feet from the ocean.
Nearby agrochemical fields in Mānā, adjacent to Polihale State Park on public lands under ADC purview
West Kauaʻi is Home to Frequent & Heavy Pesticide Usage
For over a decade, HAPA has been bringing attention to heavy RUP use on west Kauaʻi from areas where seed‑corn and other biotech field trials are conducted. Estimates in 2013 showed 22 different RUPs being used with as much as 18 tons a year being applied on west Kaua’i.
A 2013 Center for Food Safety analysis revealed that seed companies used roughly 1.7× more herbicide and up to 3× more insecticide per acre than mainland corn producers; certain active ingredients like chlorpyrifos were applied in nearly three times the mainland per-acre.
It is important that we look at the cumulative usage (amount and mixture of pesticides) to try to more accurately assess potential environmental and health impacts.
Following the release of the 2019 data we conducted comprehensive analysis of the RUP usage across Hawai’i. One of the most concerning findings from our analysis showed that West Kauaʻi saw the most frequent application of RUPʻs, averaging four times per day, according to 2019 use data.
From our analysis of 2019 restricted pesticide usage (RUP) usage data for this parcel in the lawsuit reported over 50 lbs of active (RUP) ingredient applied. This included application of 11 different products with 8 active ingredients and a total of 66 applications over the course of 2019. Of those 8 active ingredients applied: 7 are toxic to aquatic life, 6 are toxic to bees, at least 3 are water contaminants, 7 are (or are possible) endocrine disruptors and 4 are (or are possible) carcinogens. We have no idea what these compounds do in combination.
Collectively across the Mānā Plain (adjacent to this parcel), there were a whopping 1,536 total applications reported over the course of 2019, made up of a mixture of 21 different RUP products made of 16 different main active ingredients. This was a total of 1,623 lbs of active ingredient. Due to errors in the data reporting and difficulty transcribing, this is thought to be a major underestimate of the actual usage of RUPs that year.
HAPA continues to follow and try to make sense of the data turned into the Dept of Agriculture (and Biosecurity). In 2020 and 2021 that concern remains again an estimate of 16 different active ingredients being reported in 2020 (in 1,564 applications). We estimate this to be a total of around 10,178 lbs of active ingredient reportedly used on West Kaua’i in 2020.
Then in 2021, 13 different active ingredients were reported as used (in 1,1118 different applications). This resulted in 2021 reporting a total of what we estimated to be over 7,535 lbs of active ingredient reportedly used on West Kaua’i in 2021.
These trends and data, highlight recurring concerns on West Kaua’i:
Exposure Proximity - communities, schools, and sensitive environments in west Kauaʻi are near intensive RUP application zones.
Lack of Transparency - the struggle to access quality data is ongoing and existing reporting requirements are not sufficient to provide communities and scientists with the information they need, specifically related to location.
Regulatory sufficiency - while Act 45 mandated reporting and 100 foot buffer zones, these buffers are not sufficient to provide protection and there is little to no enforcement capacity and systematic environmental monitoring.
One major caveat and challenge with the RUP data listed above is that Hawaiʻi has a limited amount of pesticides currently classified as RUP’s. Hawaiʻi users of pesticides are only required to report on RUP use, not those that are considered “General Use” (GUPs). RUP’s classification is for pesticides that have more severe toxicity and RUP’s can only be purchased and applied by certified applicators. However, what gets classified as restricted varies from state to state. For example, California has three times the amount of pesticides classified as RUP’s than that of Hawaiʻi. So the data above is limited to what is publicly available, but does not include all the general use pesticides that may be used on the parcel as well.
A huge mahalo to our amazing lawyers Lance D. Collins and Bianca Isaki as well as our fellow plaintiff’s.
* Active ingredient refers to the portion of chemicals within a whole formulation that target the pest. The whole formulation also includes so-called “inert ingredients”. For example some of these “inert ingredients” increase the adherence of the chemicals to their target. It is important to note that the public health and environmental impacts of these so-called “inert ingredients” has never been studied.
