Part 8a – Integrity and Transparency in Government – Deadly Drift

This is an incident that happened to me. Here is how I described it in blog 7b – In an Ag Zone, No One Can Hear You Scream:

“Early Sunday morning, June 4, 2017, I was sicker than I had ever been before.

Too sick to even bend over, as I vomited all over the toilet, myself, and the bathroom floor— and I didn’t even care.

The previous afternoon, when I was outside mowing the lawn, a high-clearance agricultural boom sprayer sped towards me from an adjoining field and sprayed me with a cloud of a toxic herbicide.”

The subsequent conduct of the NYSDEC in the handling of their investigation of this incident and what appears to be inadequate oversight and control of licensed herbicide applicators are the issues on which I am requesting action.

While blog 7b describes the incident and investigation in some detail, several items will be added to the evidence being sent:

  • NOAA’s local weather records for the afternoon of the incident
  • Comments on the quality of the NYSDEC report by an expert
  • A photo of the site where the incident occurred

As mentioned in the introduction to this series:

In each blog, I will focus on an actual incident or issue that raises questions about the conduct of those who have been entrusted with the welfare of the public at large.

The questions and facts of the case will be included in a letter sent to the persons responsible for regulatory oversight, as well as to our elected representatives. The body of the letter will be disclosed in each blog, and the results of these letters and the names of recipients will be posted as updates.

At the end of the series, I will summarize the findings as to whether the response of Tompkins County public officials has been consistent with their duty to protect the public at large.

Below is the body of the letter:

I am writing you to request an investigation into an incident of agricultural herbicide poisoning that occurred on June 3, 2017, as well as the conduct of the NYSDEC in conducting an investigation of this incident.

I was finishing mowing my lawn on my rider mower when I noticed a self-propelled high-wheel boom sprayer moving rapidly in my direction from the north. It turned at a right angle to move quickly across the northern boundary of my lawn less than thirty feet away, and I was engulfed in a strong smelling cloud of what I later found out was Roundup. I was unable to escape because after sitting on the mower for an hour-and-a-half, at my age and condition, it takes five to ten seconds just to stand up straight.

It was a windy day. My weather station showed winds of 20 mph and the grass clippings were really flying.

I went inside and washed, but there was nothing I could do about the herbicide I had breathed in or gotten up my nose.

Early Sunday morning, June 4, 2017, I was sicker than I had ever been before.

Too sick to even bend over, as I vomited all over the toilet, myself, and the bathroom floor— and I didn’t even care.

I was in bed for 24 hours, and it was many days before I seemingly recovered.

The NYSDEC did not follow even the basic guidelines for an investigation, and never explored the reasons for the event or tried to identify the immediate and underlying causes. Instead of collecting the facts they noted only that the driver/applicator “disputed the wind speed.” The local NOAA weather records show wind speeds of 13 – 16 mph that afternoon, with gusts up to 23 mph — confirming my statement. 

It is impossible that anyone could spray under the conditions that existed that afternoon and be unaware of the wind. I also do not find it believable that Helena Chemical would not monitor wind and weather conditions and so be unaware of those conditions when they applied herbicides.

While I do not have any definitive documentation for my claims of the boom sprayer’s speed, the NYSDEC report’s evidence is indicative. “Overspray of herbicide was found on the south and east edge of the property” that was caused by herbicide applied against a NW wind. The distance that the boom must have been swung into my yard to cause that to happen is another indication of the lack of care and control with which the herbicide was applied.

The most glaring omission in the report is the absence of any investigation into how the driver/applicator could have missed seeing me on a rider mower while traveling toward me for over a hundred yards at “12 mph” and sitting in an elevated position with a completely unobstructed view — a distance that would take 18 seconds to cover at that speed.

I was unable to get permission to use a photo of one of these large boom sprayers; however these are typical specifications: height 12 feet, length 28 feet, width without boom 12 feet, and with boom extended 90-120 feet. Weight 35,000 lbs.  Spray tank size 1000-1600 gallons. Road speed with boom folded 30-40 mph. Spray application speed with boom unfolded up to 25 mph. The NYSDEC report called this high-clearance boom sprayer a “tractor.” This is a term and a usage I have never seen listed for these machines in any manufacturer’s literature.

In addition, I also found that many of my statements in the report were twisted and misrepresented in a way that could be used to discredit my testimony.

The NYSDEC report was reviewed by Gary Van Houten, a laboratory and field scientist with twelve years of inspection experience with the NYS DOH and The Cortland County Health department, where he held the title of Environmental Laboratory Consultant and Sanitarian, respectively.  He noted the following:

“The first being an investigative report should be FACTUAL, not INTERPETIVE, as in “Expressed views that was politically active against farming.” The second was the use of an exclamation point at the end of “case closed” which to me is highly unprofessional, and may be presenting a bias.”

“I also question (with ignorance on my part) if Jeffery Krueger has the authority to close the case, and was it done with the approval of his supervisor?”

Large self-propelled sprayers can cover a 30 acre field in a matter of minutes, arriving unannounced and departing without the knowledge of those affected by the herbicide drift.

In recounting my poisoning incident to others, I found that incidents of herbicide drift and its effects were not uncommon in the community. While one resident mentioned seeing herbicide drifting onto clothes hung out to dry, another was unaware that herbicide had been sprayed and made no connection to the nausea and other symptoms he experienced until later. Some spoke of the high rate of cancer in their family.

Every new report about Roundup seems to reveal another health risk. This herbicide is routinely sprayed on many thousands of acres around and among the residences of our rural families and their children, and from my and other’s experiences, without regard for our safety.

NYSDEC is directly responsible for issuing herbicide application permits and for the oversight of their proper use. Their professional and ethical conduct is essential to the health and well-being of the rural community.

Any investigation should include a check of Helena Chemicals’ records of herbicide applications against the local weather records to establish how often Roundup and other herbicides have been sprayed in dangerously windy conditions.

In addition, were there any changes of policy or personnel made within Helena Chemical at the time of my herbicide poisoning and complaint that would indicate knowledge of wrongdoing and an attempt to cover up, and did the NYSDEC had any involvement in these changes?

The NYSDEC has sometimes been pejoratively referred to by rural residents as the “Department of Environmental Corruption” — isn’t it time we changed that?

Coming next: Part 8b — Non-Disclosure Agreement?

Part 8 – Integrity and Transparency in Government Introduction

Does the public have any meaningful participation in Tompkins County’s policies?

Is the county being run for the health and well-being of all the people?

Are the county’s policies formulated for long term sustainability, or short-term gain?

In each blog, I will focus on an actual incident or issue that raises questions about the conduct of those who have been entrusted with the welfare of the public at large.

The questions and facts of the case will be included in a letter sent to the persons responsible for regulatory oversight, as well as to our elected representatives. The body of the letter will be disclosed in each blog, and the results of these letters and the names of recipients will be posted as updates.

At the end of the series, I will summarize the findings as to whether the response of Tompkins County public officials has been consistent with their duty to protect the public at large.  

Coming next week: Part 8a — Deadly Drift