|
|
State grain group director says atrazine suit subpoenas are intimidationBy Jennifer M. Latzke
Speak and you shall be heard. Speak too loudly in support of farmers safely using atrazine and you'll be subpoenaed. At least that's how Jere White, executive director of the Kansas Corn Growers Association and Kansas Grain Sorghum Producers Association explains it. In September White spoke out in support of atrazine during the Environmental Protection Agency's Atrazine Science Advisory Panel in Washington, D.C. A day after his testimony and the publishing of a subsequent column he wrote about the harassment tactics lawyers have used to intimidate growers over atrazine, White was served with subpoenas for KCGA, KGSP and for himself as an individual in regard to the state lawsuit Holiday Shores Sanitary District v. Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. and Growmark, Inc. A fourth subpoena for the Triazine Network, of which White is chairman, was issued after he spoke out in a blog posting about the previous three. A state lawsuit The Illinois state lawsuit began in 2003, White explained, when EPA determined it would move forward with the re-registration of atrazine, a chemical farmers use for weed control on corn and grain sorghum. In 2004 Holiday Shores filed a suit over standards for atrazine presence in drinking water. The attorneys in the case are what White refers to as "activist attorneys." "These folks are not just attorneys with a case, but are attorneys with an activist bias," White said. "Steven Tillery, one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs, did an Earth Day press release in 2009 that said this wasn't just about trying atrazine in the court of public law but in the court of public opinion. We think the decision for a lawsuit was made when it was clear the EPA was going to allow the continued safe use of the product under their determinations." Despite 50 years of scientific data, regulation and review, this and a federal lawsuit put the fate of atrazine's approval in the hands and at the whim of a judge, he added. A federal case On March 8 Tillery and his Dallas-based partner, the law firm of Baron & Budd, filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of Illinois on behalf of 17 cities in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Ohio and Missouri asking for Syngenta to pay for water filtration in their communities. Plaintiffs in the High Plains Journal/ Midwest Ag Journal area include Creston, Iowa, and Carbondale, Dodge City, Marion, Miami County, Oswego and Plains, Kan. White pointed out that it's interesting to note that a similar federal lawsuit was dismissed in 1999 because the judge ruled that removing safe and approved levels of atrazine from drinking water was unnecessary. "We are disturbed cities like Dodge City and Plains would go this direction, mainly because they have no atrazine issue in their water," White said. "And, they aren't treating for an issue they don't have now, but they still want money for treatment, even though their water meets all standards." Most important, he asked, if these cities have to comply with regulations for their own discharges of water, which are based on scientific facts, then why isn't it OK that the same science says the levels of atrazine in the water are not close to any levels of concern? "Part of the problem is that these communities say they don't believe in the standards and at the same time none offer alternative sources of water to consumers," White said. "None are treating for minute levels of atrazine, they may or may not have present in their drinking water." And really, he added, what's to stop someone downstream from Marion, Kan., saying they don't accept the city's standards for its discharge into surface waters--they're both based on science. "Even bigger, if cities continue on this path, farmers and ranchers should think about what's at stake when that city wants to build a reservoir close to their operation," White said. "Even though they haven't had issues in the past, how will it affect their farming operation and choices in the future?" Ultimately, it will be the farmer who pays the cost of the outcome of these atrazine lawsuits, White said. "Even if cities were successful in their lawsuit it will ultimately be the farmer that pays for it," White said. "The lawyers have tried to sell it based on the notion that Syngenta is a Swiss company and they won't be doing any harm to U.S. ag. But the notion that any expenses out of this will be paid for by anyone other than farmers in the area is nonsense." Farmers will either pay with higher costs for atrazine or the loss of the use of the chemical altogether. Cost of doing business Ken Strobel, city manager for Dodge City, disagrees. Strobel says the multi-national corporation, Syngenta, will continue to make atrazine as long as they are making money. If they don't, another chemical company with a better product will come along that doesn't have the same issues with drinking water that atrazine does, he said. "We see it as their cost of doing business," Strobel said. Which isn't to say that atrazine isn't a good product for farmers, he said, just that the company must be responsible for the effects of atrazine. "The real purpose of the suit is to establish if there is contamination of the drinking water by atrazine, who should be responsible for correcting that situation--not to ban to atrazine," he said. "[The suit] is certainly not against the farmers that are using the product." Strobel said he feels there has been a lot of misunderstanding pertaining to the suit. "We recognize that atrazine is a good product for farmers, and we aren't trying to say, 'Don't use it anymore.'" But ultimately, the city of Dodge City is responsible for providing safe drinking water to its citizens, he said. No atrazine has been found in the wells that Dodge City currently uses. It has been found twice in the past, the most recent in the late 1990s. That well now serves as an emergency-only well and has not been recently tested, Strobel said. If the city were to find atrazine in a well, either a very expensive carbon process could be used to clean the well or a new well would need to be drilled at the cost of $500,000 to $750,000. "That's major dollars--who should pay for it?" Strobel said. "Should it be the taxpayers of Dodge City or should it be the manufacturer of a product that is very beneficial, but can contaminate groundwater?" You got served The state and federal suits are both in a discovery phase, White said. These four subpoenas are among a number of those issued to non-parties like himself and KCGA, such as the National Corn Growers Association. What's disturbing is the scope of documentation they cover, he said. "They request just about every document in our office," White said. "Not just in regards to atrazine, or Syngenta or the Triazine Network, but everything I do with Kansas Corn, Kansas Grain Sorghum and things like internal communications in the office. It even applies to board members of the organization." White added that because he served on the Biotechnology Working Group with NCGA, he was privy to discussions about biotechnology products developed by Syngeta. As a part of that service he signed a confidentiality agreement so that there could be candid discussions about traits in the pipeline and their effect on growers. "Yet, any records I have regarding these discussions would be covered by the subpoena, even though this information has nothing to do with atrazine," White said. It's an intimidation tactic, he asserted. And Kansas congressional leaders agree, he added. "You know, I had been invited to speak before the Senate Ag Committee in September and I originally didn't think I could," White said. "But then, I had these subpoenas dumped on my lap after I testified for the last EPA Scientific Advisory Panel." White said he found the time to testify before the senate committee as a way of standing up against the intimidation tactics. "Senator (Pat) Roberts (R-KS) was almost beside himself over what was going on," White said. "He had them introduced into the record and said it was a chilling effect that if someone's targeted by supporting atrazine at an EPA advisory panel, then why couldn't you expect the same after testifying before the Senate?" White said he intends to fight these subpoenas as far as the law allows. "I have no intention of rolling over," he said. "There's no question it will cost us thousands of dollars, but we will fight it as far as the law allows." Despite intimidation tactics, White says he'll continue to speak out for atrazine and Kansas farmers so that their message is heard. Jennifer M. Latzke can be reached at 620-227-1807, or jlatzke@hpj.com.
Copyright/Privacy
Copyright 1995-2012. High Plains Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. Any republishing of these pages, including electronic reproduction of the editorial archives or classified advertising, is strictly prohibited. If you have questions or comments you can reach us at High Plains Journal 1500 E. Wyatt Earp Blvd., P.O. Box 760, Dodge City, KS 67801 or call 1-800-452-7171. Email: webmaster@hpj.com |
|
