Score: 0
(0/5/0)
Santa Cruz County Grand Jury
• 2020-2021
Santa Cruz County Agricultural Commissioner's Office Can Get By with a Little Help from Its Friends Planting Seeds of
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 5 findings
F1
Location information on the Notices of Intent provided by the growers and qualified applicators does not adequately describe the location of the pesticide application in a way that someone not intimately familiar with the farm could understand. This means that timely online posting of the current Notices of Intent, even if possible, would not be helpful to the public. The Department of Pesticide Regulation requires a map useful to the public on the Annual Notification of Pesticides Used Near Schools and Child Day Care Centers form.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1
, the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office should initiate a pilot program to train interested growers and applicators to use the CalAgPermits software. Goals of the pilot program should include recommendations enhancing the usefulness of the software program to growers and reducing the workload of the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office. (F1, F2, F4)
R3
, the Board of Supervisors should lobby the state and the Department of Pesticide Regulation to require that specific location information useful to the public be included on forms such as the Restricted Material Permits and the Notice of Intent forms. (F1–F4)
F2
The Department of Pesticide Regulation’s policies on application of pesticides near schools and its May 7, 2020 letter to California Agricultural Commissioners show its awareness of the changing need to inform and protect the public living near agricultural pesticide application sites.
Related Recommendations (2)
R1
, the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office should initiate a pilot program to train interested growers and applicators to use the CalAgPermits software. Goals of the pilot program should include recommendations enhancing the usefulness of the software program to growers and reducing the workload of the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office. (F1, F2, F4)
R3
, the Board of Supervisors should lobby the state and the Department of Pesticide Regulation to require that specific location information useful to the public be included on forms such as the Restricted Material Permits and the Notice of Intent forms. (F1–F4)
F3
Department of Pesticide Regulation policy changes must be influenced by the Board of Supervisors. The Agricultural Commissioner cannot exert such influence. The Board of Supervisors are in the best position to lobby the Department of Pesticide Regulation.
Related Recommendations (2)
R2
, the Board of Supervisors should assess and initiate online posting, text, or email notification of pesticide applications for nearby neighborhoods. (F3, F4)
R3
, the Board of Supervisors should lobby the state and the Department of Pesticide Regulation to require that specific location information useful to the public be included on forms such as the Restricted Material Permits and the Notice of Intent forms. (F1–F4)
F4
The Agricultural Commissioner has the difficult job of reconciling conflicting interests. The Agricultural Commissioner must consider and protect the interests of the growers, the nearby community members, the county schools, and the Department of Pesticide Regulation.
Related Recommendations (3)
R1
, the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office should initiate a pilot program to train interested growers and applicators to use the CalAgPermits software. Goals of the pilot program should include recommendations enhancing the usefulness of the software program to growers and reducing the workload of the Agricultural Commissioner’s Office. (F1, F2, F4)
R2
, the Board of Supervisors should assess and initiate online posting, text, or email notification of pesticide applications for nearby neighborhoods. (F3, F4)
R3
, the Board of Supervisors should lobby the state and the Department of Pesticide Regulation to require that specific location information useful to the public be included on forms such as the Restricted Material Permits and the Notice of Intent forms. (F1–F4)
F5
There is a demonstrated capability for advance public notice of pesticide use.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
, the Board of Supervisors should collaborate with other counties to lobby the Department of Pesticide Regulation for funds to implement a statewide program of notification, similar to the now defunded FarmingSafelyNearSchools program. (F5)
Conclusions 1
-
CL1 Page 8The CAC is not in a position to develop its own online posting software or modify the existing statewide software to accommodate public posting, especially if each notice requires research and modification of its content.[12] [20] Research suggests the DPR is in the beginning stages of gathering public input this summer on advance public notice of pesticide use.[35] Some growers may be interested in, and comfortable with, electronic entry. Some growers may be concerned that advance public notice might elicit negative reactions.[36] The public has expressed an interest in access to advance notices of pesticide application.[10] [14] [31] The CAC must answer these concerns. Setting up a pilot program to engage selected growers could help establish a method to provide the public with advance notice, provided the applications submitted use locations that could be easily located on a map. A pilot program could help provide useful feedback to the DPR and determine whether advance public posting of pesticide use is feasible.
Agency Responses 1
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.