One important PR job is to respond to newspaper headlines, and TOP STORIES in TV. Two very different responses to the recent fishkills on PEI this week, one that in my mind misses the point completely, the other is very productive.
Crop Life Canada is an industry organization representing the handful of companies that produce pesticides. It would be easy to say that its only interest is protecting the ability of its members to sell product and make money, but that's a little unfair. I was asked to speak to a regional meeting of Crop Life Canada and I "encouraged" them to take the concerns of the public much more seriously, because farmers are starting to be seen (unfairly in most cases) as "threats to the environment" rather than "stewards of the soil". No one clapped when I finished. I was impressed however with some of the research presented by scientists who do work for Crop Life under the heading " the right time, in the right place, in the right way", including using the least amount of pesticide necessary to do the job. Whether the sales people in the audience liked the message I'm not sure, but the researchers made their case very well. I think Crop Life was off the mark however in responding to the recent fishkills:
Pesticides get thorough review before they're approved for sale
Editor:
Re ‘Why is government not listening?' (The Guardian, July 29, 2011): Why would the government of Prince Edward Island listen to activists like Lisa Gallant when the federal government already regulates pesticides through Health Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency?
What readers should know is that before any pesticide can be sold in Canada it must undergo a comprehensive scientific review and risk assessment by Health Canada. Through this process, pesticides receive a greater breadth of scrutiny than any other regulated product and only those products that meet Health Canada's strict health and safety standards are registered for sale and use. The Quebec government, which Gallant uses as an example of a government that knows what it is doing, recently repositioned its stance by stating that "products containing 2,4-D do not pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment." This is exactly what the expert scientists at Health Canada have said all along.
The reality is that the Canadian Cancer Society and numerous other activist groups will continue to want more products banned, for more uses. This is just the thin edge of a wedge that leads to bans where the repercussions are more threatening to our overall health and well-being because they deny people access to safe living conditions and an abundant supply of healthy food.
The divisive debates about pesticide bans will continue as long as municipalities and provinces continue to arbitrarily ban products that have been approved for use by Health Canada. The uncertainty created by these various levels of government mean that new products will not be brought forward for approval and the public will have fewer and fewer options for controlling the numerous insect and weed infestations affecting their properties. It's high time that science-based decisions be re-introduced into the pesticides debate.
Lorne Hepworth,
president,
CropLife Canada,
representing the plant science industry"
Re ‘Why is government not listening?' (The Guardian, July 29, 2011): Why would the government of Prince Edward Island listen to activists like Lisa Gallant when the federal government already regulates pesticides through Health Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency?
What readers should know is that before any pesticide can be sold in Canada it must undergo a comprehensive scientific review and risk assessment by Health Canada. Through this process, pesticides receive a greater breadth of scrutiny than any other regulated product and only those products that meet Health Canada's strict health and safety standards are registered for sale and use. The Quebec government, which Gallant uses as an example of a government that knows what it is doing, recently repositioned its stance by stating that "products containing 2,4-D do not pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment." This is exactly what the expert scientists at Health Canada have said all along.
The reality is that the Canadian Cancer Society and numerous other activist groups will continue to want more products banned, for more uses. This is just the thin edge of a wedge that leads to bans where the repercussions are more threatening to our overall health and well-being because they deny people access to safe living conditions and an abundant supply of healthy food.
The divisive debates about pesticide bans will continue as long as municipalities and provinces continue to arbitrarily ban products that have been approved for use by Health Canada. The uncertainty created by these various levels of government mean that new products will not be brought forward for approval and the public will have fewer and fewer options for controlling the numerous insect and weed infestations affecting their properties. It's high time that science-based decisions be re-introduced into the pesticides debate.
Lorne Hepworth,
president,
CropLife Canada,
representing the plant science industry"
Most people (not all) are not questioning the right of farmers to use pesticides as Lorne Hepworth argues, but keeping those pesticides out of waterways where they can do so much damage. That's what PEI's Watershed Alliance (with no help from PR gurus) has taken on and I think it offers a much more constructive argument.
"PEI Watershed Alliance says Western PEI fish kills unacceptable
by Jim Brown • Aug. 4, 2011 •
The recent fish kills in western PEI have proven to be some of the worst in Island history, according to the PEI Watershed Alliance.
Alliance chairperson Fred Cheverie stated: “While the exact cause of the recent fish kills remains unknown, pesticide runoff from local fields is suspected.
“The streams involved in the fish kills offered optimal temperatures for fish habitat and were teeming with aquatic life, which suddenly disappeared as a result of a combination of torrential rain and agricultural operations with little safe guarding against soil erosion.
“Recent scientific research indicates that we will be experiencing more frequent severe weather events; therefore, it is now time for us as stewards of our land and streams to adapt our practices to the changing climate. We simply cannot keep blaming the weather for devastating events like this,” he stated.
Mr Cheverie went on to say: “Soil erosion remains a very serious issue on PEI, and when agricultural soil enters streams following heavy rainfall events, it can carry agricultural chemicals with it.
“We (Watershed Alliance) applaud the many agricultural producers who have made significant inroads in changing their practices to help prevent agricultural soils from ending up in our streams. However, the problems surrounding soil conservation cannot be solved by only some producers practicing innovative techniques; agricultural producers all across PEI must adopt new methods to prevent soil erosion.”
According to Alliance Vice-Chair, Mark Bishop, “Agriculture remains the single most important industry in the province. Streams and farms can co-exist well as producers on PEI have proven this. The timing of these recent events could not be worse given the fact that there have been substantial positive conservation efforts made by many PEI producers over the last decade.”
He said the rivers hit in the most recent fish kills - Trout River (Coleman), Mill River and Big Pierre Jacques - will take years to recover.
“The Mill and Trout Rivers were second to none on Prince Edward Island in terms of their contributions to sport fishing. The video footage of the dead brook trout shows what PEI streams are capable of producing.
“And to make matters worse, the Mill and Trout River were also among the few wild Atlantic salmon bearing streams left on PEI. With these recent events, the continued presence of wild Atlantic salmon in Western Prince Edward Island is unlikely.”
Mr Bishop went on to state: “While these events are certainly a huge setback for the Prince Edward Island, we need to ensure the public is aware of all of the good work agricultural producers and watershed groups are doing across the Province to enhance and conserve our environment. Cooperation from all sectors is imperative if we are to continue to move forward in addressing these issues.”
________________________________
Well said.
No comments:
Post a Comment