Pubdate: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 Source: Dallas Morning News (TX) Copyright: 2003 The Dallas Morning News Contact: http://www.dallasnews.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/117 Author: TOD ROBBERSON, The Dallas Morning News COLOMBIA COULD BAN U.S. SPRAYING Farmers, Activists Say Anti-Drug Effort Harmful To Citizens, Legal Crops BUESACO, Colombia With the fate of Washington's flagship anti-drug program hanging in the balance, a Colombian court is days away from deciding whether to ban the spraying of a U.S.-manufactured herbicide used to eradicate illicit drug crops. The ruling by a judicial tribunal awaits only the submission of an environmental study due this month. Officials acknowledge the decision could force the United States and Colombia to halt the use of glyphosate, the only chemical herbicide approved for aerial eradication of drug crops here. Colombia is by far the largest supplier of the heroin and cocaine consumed in the United States. A ban on glyphosate, known by its U.S. brand name Roundup, would bring a large part of Washington's $2 billion anti-drug effort to a screeching halt and reverse progress in a 5-year-old effort to end the cultivation of plants that provide the base ingredients for cocaine and heroin. But in Buesaco and hundreds of other towns across Colombia, peasant farmers have grown increasingly vocal in protesting the herbicide's use, charging that American-piloted crop dusters have mistakenly wiped out their legal crops and that glyphosate poses serious health risks to humans and farm animals. Their complaints coincide with efforts by constitutional and environmental activists to halt what they call the wanton destruction of the Colombian countryside with glyphosate. The ban on glyphosate is pending before the Superior Administrative Court tribunal in Cundinamarca state, north of Bogota. In addition, the federal Constitutional Court in Bogota last April ordered the government to restrict herbicide spraying over Indian reservations, which compose about 28 percent of Colombian territory. Farmers' lawsuit Buesaco farmers, like others across the country, have filed their own lawsuit against the government that demands payment for losses they say they have suffered from glyphosate. "The government claims that glyphosate doesn't harm human health or the environment. We know this is not true," said Jose Maria Moncayo, the mayor of Buesaco, in southwestern Colombia. "Our children started vomiting and developed skin rashes as soon as the spraying began. Our cattle developed respiratory infections, then started dying." Such claims have been made in Buesaco and other towns for years, and studies commissioned by the State Department have dismissed the health problems, in almost all cases, as unrelated to the spraying. Both governments insist the herbicide is safe. President Alvaro Uribe's administration has pledged to fight any court decision restricting glyphosate. But top officials acknowledge they are worried about the spate of cases. They say the Cundinamarca tribunal's ruling is only the first of many expected challenges coinciding with new results showing that the eradication campaign has killed up to 25 percent of the country's known illicit drug crops. "The traffickers are feeling this is for real and that things are going to change for the worse very, very quickly. They're going to resort to any type of means to defeat this policy and to challenge it," said Colombian Vice President Francisco Santos. "They're going to use the legal system, they're going to use violence and they're going to use corruption," he added. "We're confronting an industry, a huge criminal industry. They don't play games. We have to take these challenges seriously." Claudia Sampedro, a constitutional law professor who filed the Cundinamarca lawsuit, said she was motivated solely by a desire to see Colombian law applied appropriately. Ms. Sampedro said the government has failed on two counts: Although it insists that glyphosate is safe, the required environmental-impact studies on file are from U.S. State Department and Environmental Protection Agency studies, which are not necessarily valid under Colombian law. She added that U.S. credibility should be questioned, given the high political stakes and the recent controversy over U.S. claims about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Environmental concerns Ms. Sampedro and other opponents also argue that the government is using a significantly more powerful mix of glyphosate and other chemicals whose environmental record is not demonstrably safe. "The law requires the completion of a Colombian environmental-impact study. It is the requirement whenever you undertake any kind of activity that could affect the environment, whether it is herbicide spraying or building a house or a gas station or an airport," she said. "This entire case exists because they initiated spraying with glyphosate without carrying out the required environmental studies." Ms. Sampedro also argued that the technology for spraying glyphosate, using U.S.-piloted crop-dusting planes, is nowhere near as accurate as the U.S. and Colombian governments say.. "They would have us believe that each molecule of glyphosate is individually intelligent, so that, after it is released from the plane, it thinks, 'I am only going to fall on a coca plant,' " ignoring all plots of legally cultivated farmland nearby, she said. "Oh, please. Are they trying to suggest that this chemical only kills illicit plants, and that not a single yucca or corn or plantain plant is harmed? They treat us as if we were stupid." Although the Cundinamarca court ordered the suspension of spraying, the ruling must await an appeals process and review of an environmental study now being completed. Determined to spray Mr. Santos said the government would abide by the final decision, although it would search for any possible legal means to continue spraying including introducing a constitutional amendment allowing the government to eradicate with herbicides anywhere illicit drug crops are growing. He said anyone who thinks he can avoid eradication by intermingling illicit crops with legal crops is sorely mistaken. "Tough luck. He is using his land to poison Colombia, to destroy the land and to poison American, Colombian, Brazilian and European kids," the vice president said. He said Ms. Sampedro and others may well force the suspension of spraying. The result, he warned, will be a sudden surge in bloodshed as Colombian troops fight back the insurgents protecting the drug trade. "Oh, fine. We'll have a great environment but with dead bodies all over," Mr. Santos said. "We'll have a great environment but nobody left to live in it." Claims of inaccuracy Many peasant farmers in Buesaco, a mountain community surrounded by peaks where opium poppy flourishes, said they support ending the drug trade but complained that the spraying has at times been wildly inaccurate. "I live in a low, dry area where opium cannot grow. The closest illicit crops are eight kilometers [4.8 miles] away," said Segundo Ballardo Benavides, from the nearby village of Las Minas. When crop-dusting planes swooped down over his farm last November, he said, the herbicide killed everything: corn stalks, beans, coffee trees. Other farmers showed a videotape of spraying near Buesaco in April in which a plane swoops low over a hillside and releases herbicide. A strong gust of wind hits the herbicide upon release, dispersing it widely and carrying it far from its intended drop point. Teodoro Campo, the chief of the National Police, said glyphosate has been in use for 20 years in Colombia. The computer and satellite technology provided by the United States to guide the crop-dusting planes is said to ensure a very high rate of accuracy. "Yes, it's very possible that, with wind, the [accuracy] of the spraying could be affected," he said. "But if the drug traffickers think they can thwart us by putting, say, a coffee plantation here and here, and put a coca plantation in between so that we won't spray it, they are wrong. We will spray, and yes, that coffee will suffer." - --- MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart