Under our nose
and feet: Report on Toxic Herbicide Glyphosate in Colchester
Executive summary
The Glyphosate Working Group was formed
during the 2019 summer by Colchester and District Green party to publicise
research about glyphosates and campaign for a ban in the Colchester area.
Glyphosates, known by its more popular
brand name Roundup, is a weed killer used to control weeds in public spaces –
from schools and hospitals to parks, streets and private gardens.
Glyphosates take a long time to degrade.
Producers claim it will degrade in anything from two days to half a year. Other
reports say the figure is actually three years.
Glyphosates have been shown to be harmful
to humans, animals and biodiversity. Research suggests that the weed killer has
been linked to cancer, heart disease, autoimmune conditions such as
inflammatory bowel disease, birth defects and Parkinson’s. Three landmark cases
in the US have seen huge settlements given for glyphosate-caused cancer.
Glyphosates harm animals, including bees
and earthworms, essential for agriculture.
Across EU member states, several have
implemented, or are in the process of implementing, bans of the herbicide. Now
is the time for our council to take local action.
We recommend that CBC should, in the
short-term:
·
Declare the locations that have been treated with Roundup or
glyphosate-based herbicides.
·
Stop its use in public places, including in children’s play areas
and parks.
·
Stop glyphosate use in areas which are in close proximity to
residential properties.
·
Stop all use in areas which are close to rivers, reservoirs and
places with significant wildlife.
·
Put up necessary warnings in areas that have already been treated.
·
Warn and urge local schools and hospitals to immediately stop
using glyphosate-based herbicides.
In the long-term, CBC should:
·
Inform residents about the risk and effects of Roundup and glyphosate-based
herbicides.
·
Urge local supermarkets to put up warnings on Roundup and
glyphosate-based herbicides.
·
Hold public meetings and inform farmers - as well as residents
living close to agricultural land who face the greatest risk of exposure - on
the serious harm, risks and effects of continuous use and exposure to Roundup
and glyphosate-based herbicides.
·
Work with other regional councils and councillors to introduce a
county-wide ban and seek healthier alternatives. This measure would contribute to
public health by removing five tonnes of glyphosate-based toxic chemical
products from the streets of Essex, and prevent wasting approximately £42k of
public money on this product.
·
Implement appropriate tests and cleaning operations to areas and
soil that have been treated with Roundup and glyphosate-based herbicides by the
Council, ensuring workers and contractors carrying out the work are fully
informed and safely equipped.
Foreword
Following the exposure of Monsanto’s corruption and
lobbying of journalists and scientists, there has been a growing public
awareness and concern over glyphosate. Documents show that Monsanto and the US
Environmental Protection Agency were well aware of glyphosate’s potential
carcinogenic nature, however agreed to not publish relevant findings and
documents, and instead, keep them “confidential” as “trade secrets”.
In this report, we will:
·
Explore research that uncovers the harmful effects of glyphosate on humans, wildlife and biodiversity.
·
Outline the actions taken by Colchester Borough Council (CBC),
Essex County Council (EEC) and other UK councils with respect to glyphosates.
·
Explore court cases in the US where huge settlements have been
awarded for glyphosate harms.
·
Look at European country-wide actions against glyphosates.
·
Outline cost-effective alternatives to glyphosates.
·
Make short-term and long-term recommendations for potential
actions by CBC and ECC.
1 Introduction: What is glyphosate?
1.1 Glyphosate is a chemical compound created by the
agri-chemical giant Monsanto. The patent for glyphosate expired in the 2000s
and it is now used as a base chemical in many herbicide products.
1.2 Glyphosate, which is commonly known by its trade
name Roundup, is now owned by the German pharmaceutical giant Bayer.
1.3 According to the European Commission reports, glyphosate
is the most frequently used herbicide both worldwide and in the European Union.
1.4 There have been concerns over glyphosate’s link
with cancer for decades. Following recent legal developments and scientific
reports, local authorities as well as countries have started applying a ban on
its use.
2. Glyphosate use by Colchester Borough
Council
2.1 Publicly available Colchester Borough Council
(CBC) panel reports as well as requests made by locals under the Freedom of
Information Requests show that, at least since 2016, there have been serious
concerns and numerous requests made by the public.
2.2 In a Freedom of Information (FOI) request dated
June 2016, Colchester resident Mr Christopher Lee wrote to the council. He
noted that the European Union(EU) had voted and refused to back a limited
extension of the agricultural company Monsanto's licence for glyphosate's sale because
of growing health and environmental concerns. Mr Lee stated that, in the event that
the EU refuses to provide any license at all, what steps CBC will take to ensure
this product is: (1) removed from all local stores, (2) common users of the
product like the Landscape Group, Essex Highways and CBC itself will stop using
the chemical, and (3) these products are then disposed of properly.
2.3 In CBC’s response, Suzanne Norton, CBC Performance
Monitoring Officer informed Mr Lee that while removing products from local
stores and disposing of products fall under the authority and responsibility of
Essex County Council, Colchester Borough Council:“…are(sic) currently working
with contractors to ensure that any consequences arising from the use of glyphosate
and any possible alternatives are fully understood before a final decision can
be made regarding the most suitable way of ensuring that all our responsibilities
are met by the weed control methods employed”.
2.4 In another FOI request dated May 2018, the Council
was requested to declare how often and in which areas within the borough it
uses glyphosate. CBC declared that it applies glyphosate as a weed killer on
council-owned land such as garage sites for Colchester Borough Homes, as well
as in sports grounds, playgrounds, borders and verges.
2.5 Regarding the question on how frequently it was
being sprayed by the CBC, it was noted that spraying takes place in mid-March,
then again in September.
2.6 The exact amount of glyphosate/Roundup used by CBC
was not declared. Despite a previous FOI response which said that the council
will work with contractors to “ensure that any consequences arising from the
use of glyphosate and any possible alternatives are fully understood before a
final decision”, this time no update or information was provided.
2.7 It was, however, noted that Essex County Council
(ECC) and Highways England (HE) also
use glyphosate in the areas they are responsible for maintaining, which includes
streets and gutters, and motorways.
2.8 It was noted that ECC have said that they have no
plans to change this due to its “effectiveness”. In the same response, a link to
HE was also included. The link had information about a FOI request made to
Highways England about its own use of glyphosate. It was declared that although
HE holds information about how much and how often glyphosate is being used, they
were unable to provide a full answer on the grounds that “it would involve a
considerable diversion of resources and therefore falls under Regulation 12 (4)
(b) of the EIRs as manifestly unreasonable”. In the latter FOI, information
regarding to applications of glyphosate in Area 2 (Somerset, Avon,
Wilts&Gloucs) and Areas 6&8 (Cambridgeshire, Suffolk, Peterborough,
Norfolk, Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire & part of Suffolk) and their
quantities were provided. The data regarding the county of Essex, however, was undeclared.
2.9 A recent investigation by the Developer has
revealed that among the 297 local authorities that responded to their FOIA
request, investigators found that Essex is the sixth major user of glyphosate
with 5,015L - which surpasses Norfolk, the biggest spender on glyphosate with
3,875L.
2.10 In a CBC Policy and Publicity Panel dated
September 2018, a member of the public raised the issue of glyphosate. In the response
section, Mrs Cassandra Clements, Community Zones Group Manager, highlighted
that a discussion paper on this matter had been taken to the previous Portfolio
Holder, and since then a discussion had taken place with the ground maintenance
contractor to see what alternatives are available. It also said that “a report
on this matter is being compiled for October 2018” and that panel members will "also look at Wivenhoe who
(sic) have stopped using certain products in certain areas".
2.11 CBC and its view on glyphosates
2.11.1 In the FOI response dating May 2018, glyphosate
was described as a “toxic herbicide”, and it was acknowledged that despite being
approved by regulatory bodies, concerns about glyphosate’s effects on humans
and the environment persist.
2.11.2 It was noted that EU advisors (the European
Food Standards Agency and the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment –
BfR) claim that "glyphosate alone is not dangerously toxic to humans or
animals” and that “their opinion is based on a limited number of scientific
studies, many of which are industry led, and contradicts the claim from the
World Health Organisation that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic”.
2.11.3 It was also acknowledged that the UN’s Food and
Agriculture Organisation (FAO) found that the chemical was “unlikely to pose a
carcinogenic risk to humans from exposure through the diet”. However, FAO’s
focus was glyphosate exposure through crops which have been treated with it.
The WHO report was not limited to exposure through diet.
3 Glyphosate and its activity
3.1In response to the question of how long it takes
for glyphosate to degrade in soil, the relevant response has been that it “will
eventually” and that producers make the claim that this can be between 2 days
to 6 months.
3.2 It should be noted that the source was the
producer and that there is a significant gap between 2 days and 182 days or half
a year.
3.3 There are conflicting scientific results regarding
degradation. It was noted that some crops have shown residues for up to a year after
the soil has been treated. Other studies, however, have shown that glyphosate
formulations will affect subsequent crops for up to three years after
application.
4 The effect of glyphosates on human
health
4.1The World
Health Organisation recently branded glyphosates “probably carcinogenic to
humans”.
4.2 Those most
vulnerable to glyphosate toxicity are children playing in parks where the
herbicide is sprayed and the workers spraying it. In London, Hammersmith &
Fulham Council was the first to halt the use of these potentially harmful
sprays in their parks and open spaces. The borough has been pioneering trials
of chemical-free weed killers. The scrapping of controversial glyphosate-based
weed killers, which were used by council contractors, is a key part of the Council’s
ambition to protect residents’ health and become the greenest local authority
in the country.
4.3 Pesticide
Action Network’s (PAN) UK Director, Keith Tyrell, said at the time: "We
warmly welcome Hammersmith & Fulham's decisive action in taking the decision
to stop using these herbicides and hope to work closely with them on this
project”. Previously, the Council’s contractors - Quadron, Pinnacle and Serco -
used various forms of glyphosate herbicides across the borough’s parks,
roadsides and other public green spaces. The Council instructed them to stop
using these herbicides.
4.4 Most of the glyphosate restrictions or bans
throughout the world were introduced following the 2015 International Agency for
Research on Cancer’s (IARC) report on glyphosate. This
report concluded that glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen”. According to
the report, the
cancers most associated with glyphosate exposure were found to be non-Hodgkin
lymphoma and other hematopoietic cancers. The report further concluded
that glyphosate exposure caused DNA and chromosomal damage in human cells, as
well as genotoxic, hormonal and enzymatic effects in mammals.
4.5 Other
glyphosate studies have linked the chemical to a number of health issues,
including, but not limited to: ADHD, Alzheimer’s Disease, Autism, Birth
Defects, various forms of cancer, Coeliac Disease, Colitis, Heart Disease,
Inflammatory Bowel Syndrome, Kidney Disease, Liver Disease and Parkinson’s
Disease.
4.6 The number of
cities, counties, states and countries throughout the world who have taken
steps to ban glyphosates
steadily increased. Several
countries have issued outright bans over the human health concerns and because
of the ongoing Roundup cancer litigation in various parts of the world. Complete countrywide bans already exist in
the six countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council and Belgium. Portugal
prohibits the use of glyphosate in all public spaces and so far Austria
will ban next year (2020), France in 2021 and Germany in 2023. Already in the
UK, 14 boroughs and townships have issued bans or restrictions on pesticides
and herbicides, including glyphosate.
4.7 A Chinese study
discovered that there is a likely link between Coronary Artery Disease (CAD)
and exposure to glyphosate herbicides at work. A Washington USA study discovered that there is a likely link between
premature mortality
by Parkinson’s disease. A new South African study has shown that glyphosate and glyphosate-based
herbicides are genotoxic and cytotoxic to human cells at the levels the human
population is currently exposed to. Moderate levels of glyphosate and its
formulations vary in their cytotoxicity and genotoxicity in a whole blood model
and in human cell lines with different oestrogen receptor status.
4.8 Multiple new
studies performed by independent scientific institutions in several countrieshavefound
that exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs), including Roundup, caused
reproductive and developmental effects in both male and female rats, at a dose
level currently considered safe for humans in the US (1.75 mg/kg bw/day).
5. Glyphosate: effects on wildlife and the environment
5.1 Research has indicted that glyphosate is harmful
to fish, frogs and tadpoles, mice, rats, earthworms, amphibians, birds and
bees. Farm animals and pets are also adversely affected.
5.2 It was found that glyphosates also lead to the
elimination of specific plant growth essential for butterflies and insects.
5.3 Studies on rivers found that glyphosate leads to an
increase in algal bloom. It damages the fertility
of soil and the demise of earthworms further affects soil quality.
5.4 Glyphosate has been also found in wind-blown
material which adds to the negative impact on the ecosystem. It has led to the
formation of glyphosate-resistant super weeds.
5.5Studies
from 2004 and 2009 found that glyphosate causes endocrine disruption,
birth defects, tumours, liver damage and kidney damage in mice and rats when
used below the acceptable daily levels,.
5.6 It was found that glyphosate causes deformities in
tadpoles
and is toxic to frogs, fish and water fleas,. Studies have shown it is
harmful to a wide range of animals, including fish, reptiles, amphibians, birds
and earthworms.
5.7 Motta et al
(2017)found that microbiota in honey bees can be altered by exposure to glyphosate
which affects their health and life expectancy.
5.8 Aparico, Aimar et
al (2016) found glyphosate in wind-blown
material which has a negative effect on the ecosystem as well as human health.
5.9 Toxins
from glyphosates have been found in Danish dairy cows and the National Pesticide
Information (NPI) in the USA found dogs eating grass sprayed with glyphosate
experienced vomiting, diarrhoea, weight loss and drooling, and 15% of dogs
developed serious symptoms. Plant pathologist, Dr Don Huber, found the
fertility of the soil to be badly affected.
5.10 Another study by Dr Robert Kremer found
glyphosate-resistant super weeds, and Pesticide
Action Network Asia and the Pacific found fourteen
weeds in 14 countries that have developed resistance to glyphosate.
6 Recent legal developments
6.1 In July 2018, a historic trial began in San
Francisco, where DeWayne Johnson, a former groundskeeper for a school in
Benicia and staff responsible for applying Roundup, brought a case against
Monsanto. Johnson provided evidence that he had lesions and rashes on his skin
after being regularly exposed to the chemical. In 2014, at the age of 42, he was
eventually diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).
6.2 The court allowed Johnson to provide scientific
argument on the effects of glyphosate. Johnson’s lawyers highlighted that the World
Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
classified the chemical as “probably carcinogenic” and also provided evidence
on the Monsanto activities aimed at undermining the IARC findings, harassing scientists and
preventing reports being published,emails to workers to
claim publicly that the product in question is “not carcinogenic” and deliberate plans to
“ghost-write” favourable research.
6.3 After a month-long trial, the jury ruled that
Monsanto was liable for Johnson’s cancer, and found that it had acted with
“malice or oppression” and should have known that its product was “dangerous”. The
court ordered the firm to provide a financial award of $289m for the past and
future economic losses and punitive damages.
6.4 In March 2019, a claim by Mr Edwin Hardeman became first of its kind in US
federal court and a major blow to Monsanto and its parent company, Bayer.
6.5 Edwin Hardeman, a 70-year-old Santa Rosa man,
became the first person to challenge Monsanto’s herbicide in a federal trial, alleging
that his exposure to the glyphosate weedkiller caused him to develop
non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), a cancer that affects the immune system. After hearing all the
evidence and arguments presented by the plaintiff, Mr Hardeman, and the
defendant, Monsanto, the jury reached the unanimous verdict that Mr Hardeman
proved by a preponderance of evidence that his exposure to Roundup was a
substantial factor in causing his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The jury ordered
Monsanto to pay roughly $80 million in damages for failing to warn Edwin
Hardeman of the cancer risks of Roundup herbicide.
6.6 Hardeman’s case is considered a “bellwether” trial in the federal court
system, which means the verdict could potentially have an impact on the way
future litigation and potential settlements are resolved. NPR's Vanessa Romo
reported on the verdict, explaining: "The
verdict is the second in the U.S. to find a connection between the herbicide's
key ingredient, glyphosate, and the disease. In August, another San Francisco
jury determined Roundup had caused cancer in a former groundskeeper. It also
decided Monsanto, the company that developed the popular weedkiller,
deliberately failed to warn consumers or regulators about the product's risks”.
6.7 A second Roundup cancer trial in San Francisco’s
Federal Court concluded that Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide was a substantial
factor causing cancer in a Californian man. During the trial, it was
revealed that Monsanto, purchased by Bayer last summer, had intentionally
deceived the public, scientific community and the authorities by discrediting
international cancer scientists and promoting counter messages of glyphosate
safety instead.
6.8In the US alone, there are now more than 18,400
people who have filed suits against Monsanto alleging that exposure to the
Roundup herbicide caused them or their loved ones to develop non-Hodgkin
lymphoma, and that Monsanto covered up the risks.
6.9With the emerging scientific reports and legal
precedents, many countries in Europe introduced partial and total bans against
usage of glyphosate.
6.10In September 2017, the EU assessment of
glyphosate, and in particular the content of the assessment report submitted to
EFSA by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) received heavy
criticism from many European press outlets.
6.11In October 2017 the European Parliament approved a
non-binding resolution to ban the chemical's use by 2022. However, in December
2017, the law-making executive branch of the EU, the Commission, voted to
extend the glyphosate’s license for another five years.
6.12France, along with Austria, Belgium, Croatia,
Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg and Malta voted against the
extension. Germany, on the other hand, supported the extension. However, roughly
one year later the country introduced stricter national regulations for
pesticides. The Czech Republic has also announced it will limit its use.
6.13Following the publication of the assessment in
September, four EU lawmakers — Finland's Heidi Hautala, Hungary's BenedekJavor,
France's Michele Rivasi and Belgium's Bart Staes — filed a case against the
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in May 2017.Lawmakers highlighted that
while the European Commission used the findings to classify the chemical as
“safe”, as lawmakers they were denied access to the same studies, based on the
argument that it could harm “the
commercial interests of companies that presented the studies”.
6.14In March 2019, the General Court of the European
Union decided that EFSA’s decisions to refuse access to the toxicity and
carcinogenicity studies on the active substance glyphosate were annulled. The
court said that: “The public interest in
having access to the information relating to emissions into the environment is
specifically to know not only what is, or foreseeably will be, released into
the environment, but also to understand the way in which the environment could
be affected by the emissions in question”.
6.15In January 2019, the Guardian revealed that a
cross-party group of members of the European Parliament commissioned an
investigation into claims that Germany’s Federal Institute for Risk Assessment
(BfR) copy-and-pasted tracts from Monsanto studies. The study found that EU
regulators based a decision to relicense the controversial weed killer on an
assessment plagiarised from industry reports.
6.16Since the Johnson trial in the US, there has been
growing political and legal action in Europe. The German multinational
pharmaceutical company Bayer purchased Monsanto in June 2018. Since then, its
investors have protested the deal and company’s shares have
fallen about 40% from $63 billion (to €56 billion). In May 2019, a secret
list created by Bayer was exposed. The list, which contained the personal
information of 200 French lawyers and journalists who have been researching and
are critical of Monsanto and its products was brought to light. The French
newspaper Le Monde and one of its
journalists complained that they were on the list drawn up since 2016 and
allegedly leaked by US public relations firm FleishmanHillard. The French
police started an investigation on the possible "collection of personal
information by fraudulent, unfair or illicit means”.
6.17On 12 December 2017, the Commission renewed its approval
of glyphosate for five years. The Commission's
implementation act entered into force with Annexes (revision 4), as voted for by
the Appeal Committee. Although the licence was renewed for a further 5 years,
attached Annexes expressed that member states shall pay particular attention
to: “the protection of the groundwater in vulnerable areas, in particular with
respect to non-crop uses;the protection of operators and amateur users;the risk
to terrestrial vertebrates and non-target terrestrial plants; the risk to
diversity and abundance of non-target terrestrial arthropods and vertebrates
via trophic interactions; compliance of pre-harvest uses with good agricultural
practices. Conditions of use shall include risk mitigation measures, where
appropriate”.
6.18 In addition to the countries analysed below, Italy, Belgium, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands have also introduced
certain bans and restrictions on the use of glyphosate. In January 2019, French
authorities banned the sale of Roundup Pro 360 and restrictions on its use are
also in force in the Czech Republic, Italy and the Netherlands. In July 2019, the
Maltese government announced that it will implement a ban on products
containing glyphosate from public spaces and its use will not be allowed at
roundabouts, central strips, near schools or hospitals and a list of other
public areas.
Country Profile: Austria
On 2nd July 2019, Austria became the first
European country to ban all uses of glyphosate. Voting took place in Austria’s
lower house of parliament.
The bill was introduced by the Social Democratic Party
(SPÖ), which sought a total ban on glyphosate. They received some criticism
from the Austrian People's Party (ÖVP), who said that it was in favour of a ban
on the use of plant protection products containing glyphosate in public parks,
cemeteries, sports and leisure facilities, swimming pools, on school grounds
and children's playgrounds, in the immediate vicinity of health facilities and
in private home and gardens. However, they raised concerns over such a ban’s
effect on farmers.
Parliament voted in favour of banning glyphosate. Pamela
Rendi-Wagner, chairwoman of the SPÖ, who is a member of the Committee on Health
and former Minister of Health and Women, said that “the scientific evidence of
the plant poison's carcinogenic effect is increasing. It is our responsibility
to ban this poison from our environment”. In response to the ÖVP, she said: “the
health of the people, the protection of our children, must always have
priority”.
On 11th July 2019, the SPÖ and other
proponents of the general ban gained a majority in Federal Council and confirmed
the general ban on glyphosate. The ban will take effect
on 1stJanuary 2020.
Country Profile: Germany
In 2015, following the World Health Organization’s
(WHO) cancer research, Germany’s state ministers published a common resolution which
called for “the supply to and use (of glyphosate) by private persons to be
banned for precautionary reasons”.
Following a petition and protest, Christian Meyer, Lower
Saxony’s Minister of Food, Agriculture, Consumer Protection and State
Development Minister and chairman of the Consumer Protection Minister
Conference, said that glyphosate “should not be found in gardens, parks or on
children’s playgrounds” and expressed his concerns that it should not be used
in private gardens either.
Last year, the German Environment Ministry announced a
series of new regulations on use of herbicides and pesticides. Among these
regulations, the toughest policy was on glyphosate and similar products for which
a “staged exit from the use” was defined as the objective.
The Agriculture Ministry, which previously recommended
a ban on using glyphosate in private gardens and parks, announced its plans to
further limit where glyphosate could be used, including ecologically sensitive
areas and water protection zones with a general rule that the product cannot be
used within 20 metres of water.
Svenja Schulze, the Environment Minister, stated that
the ministry will also change the approval process for pesticides and
herbicides that impact the environment. From 2020, those farmers who want to
use glyphosate and similar herbicides will be required to set aside 10% of
their farmland to protect biological diversity.
In September 2019, following the Austrian ban, the
German government agreed to ban the use of glyphosate. On 4th
September, the German cabinet agreed to ban the use of glyphosate after a
phased effort to reduce its usage by farmers. As a part of an “insect
conservation programme”, Schulze announced that a systematic reduction strategy
will be implemented and it will initially prohibit the application of glyphosate
in domestic gardens, allotments and on the edge of agricultural land.
Considering the fact that among the major chemical
groups producing Roundup and glyphosate- based herbicides, two of the major
ones are located in Germany, it is likely that
current legal and political development in the Germany as a main
glyphosate-based herbicide and Roundup producing county will have an effect in
other consuming states.
Country Profile: France
France voted against extending the European license in
2017, and following the extension of the license, President Emmanuel Macron
announced that the French government will ban glyphosate within three years. In May 2018, the French government promised
that glyphosate will be banned “for its main uses” by 2021, and “for all of its
uses” within five years.
In January 2019, a court hearing took place in Lyon,
southeast France, where an administrative tribunal ruled that the French food
and environmental safety agency (ANSES) should have given “more weight to
potential safety risks when authorising the use of Roundup Pro 360 in March
2017”.
Corinne Lepage, a lawyer for the CRIIGEN genetics
research institute, defined the ruling a "major hit” which has the potential to
be extended to all versions of Roundup on the grounds that the court described all
products containing glyphosates“probably carcinogens”.
Following the ruling that regulators failed to take
safety concerns into account when clearing the widely used herbicide, the ANSES
officially forbade the sale of Roundup. A law banning the use of
synthetic pesticides in public parks and spaces was enacted and brought into
force. In January 2019, home
gardeners countrywide have also been banned from using synthetic pesticides.
Regarding a total ban, the French government came under
increased pressure from members of the agricultural sector, which is the
European Union’s largest grain producer. In an attempt to placate farmers, the
French Agriculture Minister Didier Guillaume expressed that, by January 2021,
there will be more and more sectors that have come out of glyphosate, signalling
that French law will be more flexible on agricultural usage of glyphosate.
Last May, Daniel Cueff, mayor of Langouët in Brittany,
declared that he imposed a ban on pesticide use within 150 metres of the
district’s homes and workplaces. Mr Cueff stated that under the 2009 European
Union directive on pesticides, as a member state,
France needs to take steps to protect residents from pesticides and there had
been incompetence by the state. Following Mr Cueff, some
20 French mayors enforced a full glyphosate ban from their municipalities last
month — in defiance of their national government,.
Following the WHO report which boosted the
anti-chemical movement in the countryside, Paris and four other French cities,
including Lille in the north, Nantes in the west, Grenoble in the south-east
and the central city of Clermont-Ferrand took action and implemented the ban,
citing the need to safeguard biodiversity and public health. Although Mr Cueff’s
appeal is ongoing, by the beginning of September, some 40 local decision-makers
had imposed similar pesticide buffer-zones in towns and villages across France
noting “we only have one single objective: to protect the interest of our
inhabitants”.
7Alternatives to glyphosates
7.1 WeedingtechFoamstream
7.1.1Foamstream
uses hot, biodegradable foam which is herbicide-free. It controls weeds by
using the heat in hot water, insulated by a biodegradable foam blanket. The
foam stops the heat escaping to the atmosphere, keeping the heat on the plant
for longer and therefore killing the weeds.
7.1.2 Foamstream
usually requires the same treatment cycles per season as glyphosates but less
than many other herbicide-free alternatives. When treating moss and algae,
Foamstream requires only one treatment per year. Due to the system’s high heat
retention, Foamstream is also suitable for outdoor cleaning tasks, including
chewing gum removal, power washing and general sanitisation jobs.
7.1.3 Glastonbury
Town Council, Somerset, home to over 10,000 residents, became the first council
in the UK to ban herbicide use in its Borough. It trialled Foamstream in 2015
and adopted it in 2016. Glastonbury found it 900 times cheaper than manual
weeding and also found that Foamstream can be used in all weathers.
7.2 Park Management Techniques
7.2.1 Glyphosate use in parks can be reduced
and eliminated by effective park management techniques. The Level Park, in the
centre of Brighton, is completely herbicide free. Flower beds are planted to
full capacity, leaving less space for weeds to grow. Good soil management
results in healthier plants that are more resilient to pests and diseases. No
peat-based materials are used (organic material only) such as autumn leaves,
grass trimmings, spent coffee grounds, wood ash and tea leaves.
7.2.2 Over 95% of their green waste is
recycled on site. Designated areas of the park are simply left to grow,
increasing biodiversity. Also, by having their own seed bank and propagating
50-60% of their plants, they ensure that the plants are hardier.
7.3 White Vinegar and
Salt
7.3.1 Although not as effective as Foamstream,
this mixture can be used on small areas as a cheap alternative. A combination
of one cup of salt to one gallon of vinegar have been found an alternative
solution to prevent anything growing on that spot for some time. Otherwise use of
vinegar, found to kill weeds in two to three days.
7.4 Letting the Weeds
Grow
7.4.1 Across the UK, some councils are letting
wild flowers grow on roadside verges in order to promote biodiversity. For
example, Rotherham Council have planted eight miles of wildflower verges, which
has saved the Council approximately £23,000 in mowing costs. This followed a campaign by the group
Plantlife. Nottinghamshire Council have piloted a similar scheme.
8 Responsibilities of Colchester Borough Council
8.1While the laws detailing Council responsibilities
are spread out over multiple acts of parliament, necessitating the 2011
Government Review of Statutory Duties on Local Government, it is enshrined in
law that all councils at all levels have a duty of care and responsibility to
protect their residents. This is a
long-established and proud tradition of the UK and is noted by CBC in its
frameworks.
8.2 CBC notes in its Strategic Plan 2018-2021 that
they will “promote and improve Colchester and its environment”, and the
residents’ pride in “the borough’s open spaces”. Therefore, the use of
glyphosates should be a concern for the Council. In the same manner that
CBC is seeking to improve and reduce air pollution, so too should it make
residents aware of the risks and dangers, and investigate alternatives.
8.3 Although the EU has not yet banned the use of
glyphosates, the World Health Organisation 2015 finding that they are “probably
carcinogenic to humans” is of concern and grounds for the cessation of use. A
University of Washington 2019 study found that glyphosate increased the
likelihood of non-Hodgkin lymphoma by 41%.
8.4 The European Sustainable Use Directive is applicable in this
instance, urging that “member states must pay particular attention to risks in
places such as public parks and gardens, sports and recreation grounds, and in
the close vicinity of healthcare facilities”, where “risks from exposure to
pesticides are high in these areas and pesticide use should be minimised or
prohibited”. For that reason, it is fundamentally necessary that residents, as
well as sprayers and users of these spaces, have the right to be informed and
be aware of the risks of being close proximity to sprayed glyphosates. Signage
should be deployed to inform the public.
8.5 Essex County Council (ECC) has stated that they
will not cease using glyphosates unless “the product should fail to achieve a
license [in 2022 or before]... acting in line with the law and
appropriate/relevant guidance”. In a recent
investigation, it was found that ECC deployed over 5,000 litres of the
herbicide in 2018-2019.
8.6 Therefore CBC has a responsibility to lead the
charge in protecting one of the fastest-growing towns in the UK by
demonstrating a real commitment to leadership on this matter. As the statutory
party responsible for overseeing the environmental health as well as human
health, it is crucial that CBC protect its residents and young people.
8.7 The Health and Safety Executive advocates councils
to focus on “the significant risks - those with potential to cause real harm
and suffering - and avoid wasting resources on insignificant risks”. Given the growing body
of evidence, as well as increasing litigation against using glyphosates, it is
recommended that CBC should pursue the precautionary principle and seek to use
other methods which have no negative impact on humans. By joining the impressive
list of countries and councils banning
glyphosates, such as Austria, Malawi, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Oman, Saudi Arabia,
Bermuda, Belgium, Denmark, France, and local authorities such as Glastonbury, and Hammersmith,
Colchester can add its name to a progressive, sustainable and forward-thinking
leadership.
8.8By ceasing use of glyphosates, CBC collectively work
towards achieving its corporate priority “to be the cleanest and greenest
borough in the country” expressed at its "Scheme of Delegation to Cabinet Members.
9 Glyphosate Working Group Recommendations
9.1 Following the recent scientific and legal
developments, it is clear that glyphosate and Roundup can have a direct and
lasting negative impact on the environment, workers and contractors who are
responsible for spraying the toxic herbicide, as well as residents and
bystanders.
9.2 Therefore, as the local executive that is
responsible and accountable to its residents, CBC should prepare and implement
a glyphosate ban to prohibit the usage of Roundup and glyphosate-based
herbicides, and lead the national movement towards a greener and healthier
society and environment.
9.3 Short-term actions that can be taken
immediately by Colchester Borough Council:
·
Declare the locations that have been treated with Roundup or
glyphosate-based herbicides.
·
Stop its use in public places, including in children’s play areas
and parks.
·
Stop glyphosate use in areas which are in close proximity to
residential properties.
·
Stop all use in areas which are close to rivers, reservoirs and
places with significant wildlife.
·
Put up necessary warnings in areas that have already been treated.
·
Warn and urge local schools and hospitals to immediately stop
using glyphosate-based herbicides.
9.4 Long-term actions that can be taken
by Colchester Borough Council can be identified as:
·
Inform residents about the risk and effects of Roundup and
glyphosate-based herbicides.
·
Urge local supermarkets to put up warnings on Roundup and
glyphosate-based herbicides.
·
Hold public meetings and inform farmers - as well as residents
living close to agricultural land who face the greatest risk of exposure - on
the serious harm, risks and effects of continuous use and exposure to Roundup
and glyphosate-based herbicides.
·
Work with other regional councils and councillors to introduce a
county-wide ban and seek healthier alternatives. This measure would contribute
to public health by removing five tonnes of glyphosate-based toxic chemical
products from the streets of Essex, and prevent wasting approximately £42k of
public money on this product.
·
Implement appropriate tests and cleaning operations to areas and
soil that has been treated with Roundup and glyphosate-based herbicides by the
Council, ensuring workers and contractors carrying out fully informed and
safely equipped.
Acknowledgements
This report has been produced by the Glyphosate Working Group (GWP),
formed by the Colchester and District Green Party. The views in this document
reflect those of the GWP, and should not necessarily be taken to reflect the
official opinion of Colchester and District Green Party.
Prepared by: Clare Burgess,
John Burgess, Kemal Çufoğlu, Mark Goacher and Steph Nissen
with editing and design
Deborah Talbot, Clare Smee and Blake Roberts.
Report ends
Printed by Blake Roberts. Promoted by
Robbie Spence on behalf of all at Colchester & District Green Party; all at
124 Morant Road, Colchester, CO1 2JD
