Chemical Reaction
by Bob Condor
Ninety-six percent of Washington’s school districts use pesticides linked to cancer, nerve damage, developmental harm and hormone disruption. Seven of 10 schoolchildren are routinely exposed to five or more high-hazard chemicals — some of the bigger ones use upwards of a dozen or more. Even with the statewide Children’s Pesticide Right-to-Know Act passed in 2002, the majority of schools are not properly reporting pesticide use.
Doesn’t that make you mad?
Yes, said these activists and parents. They have reacted by changing school policies and parent mindset. But they’re not about to stop now.
LESSON PLAN
The success stories you want to hear and celebrate. Elizabeth Koch tells the best one about getting the chemicals out of her community’s schoolyards and classrooms.
“I stood out in the parking lot of my son’s elementary school for two days after school collecting about 50 signatures from parents,” recalled Koch, who lives in Vancouver, Wash. “I had a letter for parents to sign that identified the chemicals going into the [garden] beds in the parking lot areas.”
Koch felt awkward and a bit self-conscious approaching her fellow parents. She never really visualized herself as a radical. But she kept thinking about the government-recognized toxic chemicals in the garden beds and her own son’s allergic reaction to certain chemicals and compounds.
“Kids walked across and through those parking lot beds every day to get into the school or their family cars.”
The way Koch sees it, those chemicals were being tracked into classrooms and car floors and even homes. She mailed copies of the letter signed by about 10 percent of the parent population to school administrators, including the superintendent and maintenance chief. Both officials responded positively and wanted to work with parents.
That was 2001. By the spring of 2002, the Vancouver school district had a district-wide policy in place that requires an integrated pest management (IPM) approach to any and all insect prevention. Vancouver schools cut way back on pesticide use and now use more toxic chemicals only as a last resort.
For example, the schools will use a vacuuming technique for bee control and only go to harsh chemicals in small amounts for persistent bee problems.
Vancouver is one of the state’s role-model programs for eliminating pesticides from schools. Koch’s leadership — and stepping out of her comfort zone — helped significantly cut the chemical load at 32 schools serving more than 22,000 students. Parents and organizers around the state call Koch for advice. She knows more about killing bugs and controlling weeds than she ever dreamed.
“One of the things I am most proud about is that integrated pest management is now part of the science curriculum for the students,” says Koch, who is mother of two middle schoolers. “They will learn it’s best not to use pesticides on our home lawns and gardens, or at school.”
PARENTS AND PESTICIDES
When Elizabeth Koch started working toward safer, healthier conditions for Vancouver students, only two other districts in the entire state were actively curbing pesticide use. One was Sedro-Woolley and the other was Bainbridge Island.
“People consider our island green-minded,” says Maria Mason, who pronounces her first name Ma-RYE-ah. “As islanders, we do worry more about what goes into the water that surrounds us.”
Nonetheless, Mason said educating fellow parents and neighbors was her first task when she jumped into the schools-and-pesticides fray more than 10 years ago. She was a pioneer who became interested in toxins activism when the remodeling of her children’s elementary school included using a high-hazard solvent to remove adhesive from asbestos tiles.
“People [students and teachers] were getting terribly sick,” recalls Mason. “Some of the students are still affected. There were no policies or procedures in place for indoor air pollution problems.”
Mason started asking related questions about pesticide use on school property, both inside and on the grounds. Nobody believed the school district was using chemicals to intentionally harm the children, including Mason herself, but some community members did equate her activism to that belief. This was a real-life lesson for Mason.
“It turned out to be a real education for my kids too,” says Mason, mother of one college student and one high-schooler. “We got beat up as activists.”
Through another parent’s lawsuit about the asbestos issue, Mason even learned that one local realtor was specifically excluding Mason and her family from get-acquainted parties to introduce prospective homebuyers to neighbors. The realtor apparently considered Mason to be a negative influence and too outspoken about school pesticide issues.
That didn’t stop Mason. It only fueled her determination. After five years, she helped the school district pass an integrated pest management policy. For the late 1990s, those pesticides guidelines were leading edge and, sadly, still fairly uncommon in Washington.
Mason serves a statewide pesticides and schools committee that meets quarterly in Olympia. She is joined by other parent-activists, but also school administrators, maintenance supervisors, pesticide contractors and interested legislators, including State Sen. Tracy Eide, D - Federal Way.
“Now it’s come full circle,” she says. “People in the community see what I am doing as positive and important.”
HALF A LOAF
When the Children’s Right-to-Know Act was passed two years ago, it marked the first time state schools were required by law to notify parents about any scheduled spraying or other pesticide applications. Signs must be posted at the application site, whether indoors or outdoors. Signs must be posted at the school’s main office at least 48 hours before using the pesticide anywhere on school property. Parents are to be notified at least 48 hours in advance unless the pesticide application is scheduled at a time when the students will not be occupying the school for the following 48 hours. A final requirement is that schools keep records of all pesticide use and prepare annual reports.
With utmost respect, Washington Toxics Coalition executive director Gregg Small calls the bill “half a loaf.” That’s not to criticize the work of activists and legislators who got the law passed — quite the contrary; he champions the effort — but to indicate that the best scenario for our schoolkids would be a statewide policy for integrated pest management. He and WTC pesticides coordinator Angela Storey are focused on just that, with regular visits to Olympia and anywhere else they can get the ear of state legislators.
Small and Storey aren’t about to predict that a statewide policy bill will pass this coming legislative session. But neither organizer — praised widely by engaged parents and community activists — was willing to rule it out.
What makes the issue so difficult is the debate about whether toxic pesticides are affecting children’s health. Researchers like Dr. Phil Landrigan at the Mt. Sinai School of Medicine in New York connect certain high-hazard pesticide use to learning disabilities and hyperactivity, which continue to rise among U.S. schoolchildren. Duke University scientists have made similar connections in peer-reviewed academic studies.
WHAT WE CAN DO
But this is America, circa 2004. We are exposed routinely to dozens of chemicals in daily life, especially if you are not discriminate about household cleaners or pesticide-sprayed produce. It is virtually impossible to prove beyond any doubt that pesticides used at schools are directly responsible for causing attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity, learning disabilities or the climb in children’s brain cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and leukemia.
At least not yet. When researchers are able to make the direct link between high-hazard pesticides and kid’s illness, the work of engaged parents and community members will be, to use a school gym term, a slam dunk.
For now, there is contention about just how toxic is toxic.
Jill Albinger is a parent, nurse and pesticide activist who lives in Kirkland. She has been meeting with Lake Washington school district officials (covering parts of Kirkland and Redmond) for five years with “lots of frustration” and “some progress.”
To paraphrase, this is what Albinger heard from one school board member: “A dangerous chemical in your mnd is not necessary a high-hazard chemical in mine.”
We can’t accept that statement for an answer. We must follow the lead of community members like Albinger, Maria Mason and Elizabeth Koch in our own school districts. It’s September, and time to ask questions along with packing lunch or hearing about a nephew’s new teacher.
There is just too much riding on the gamble that toxic pesticides used on lawns and in hallways and classrooms won’t harm children. What’s more, it’s proven that kids are more affected by chemical invaders to the body than adults.
“There are two parts to why children are exposed at a higher rate,” says Storey. One is behavior and the other is body size.
“Children are closer to the ground. They roll around, touch things, put them in their mouths. Their bodies are smaller. They have more skin surface area volume [allowing toxins to permeate], they breathe more [twice as much] and eat more for their size.”
Storey said pesticides activism is “ in large part mindset.”
“Pesticides are what traditionally are used to get rid of insects and pests,” she says matter-of-factly. “They work. It’s always been the way pests are managed [or so it seems.]
“Pressure is the only way to change that mindset. It starts with us.”
Bob Condor is the father of two second graders. He was happy to discover his children’s school is above average in limiting pesticide use.
