Senate to Consider Spraying Toxic Mold On The Drug Fields Of Colombia

[Guest guest]

(javascript:void(0)

(http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/pressroom/pressrelease/index.cfm?sendemail=1)

Senate to Consider ONDCP Reauthorization Act to Revive Controversial

Herbicide Spraying

New Report Calls Proposed Research Reckless, Unnecessary and Waste of

Taxpayer Money

USDA, State Department, CIA and DEA Previously Rejected Unpredictable and

Unsafe Drug Control Strategy

For Immediate Release: Tuesday, April 4, 2006. Contact: Tony Newman

646-335-5384 or Tommy Mc 646-335-2242

A new report shows that a proposed Congressional plan to require the Office

of National Drug Control Policy to revive research into toxic fungal “

mycoherbicides†is extremely reckless, dangerous and unpopular, even with

White

House Drug Czar Walters. These mold-like biological agents would be

sprayed

on drug crops in foreign countries, such as Colombia and Afghanistan, where

coca and opium are illegally produced. The report, “_Repeating Mistakes of

the Past: Another Mycoherbicide Research Bill_

(http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/Mycoherbicide06.pdf) ,†tracks thirty

years of failed research and calls

the current bill language, “duplicative, [holding] no promise of success,â€

and a massive waste of millions in taxpayer dollars.

The use of mycoherbicides has been rejected by every U.S. government agency

that has studied them, including the Department of Agriculture, the State

Department, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Drug Enforcement

Administration. Mycoherbicides were shown to be harmful to the workers who

handled

them; toxic to non-target crops, such as food, flower, and licit drug crops;

persistent in the environment for months or years; and ineffective against

resistant coca and poppy strains.

Further, the report, commissioned by the Drug Policy Alliance, shows that

the proposed unilateral deployment of mycoherbicides will be perceived globally

as biological warfare with potentially negative diplomatic consequences.

“If it becomes law, this bill will have very deleterious consequences for

the United States and its relations with the rest of the world,†said

Bigwood, author of the study. “The proposed unilateral deployment of

mycoherbicides by the United States in foreign countries would be considered a

violation of the Biological Weapons Convention, and would likely increase

support for

the insurgencies in Colombia and Afghanistan. We must hold ourselves

accountable to the same standards regarding biological weaponry as we hold our

allies and enemies alike.â€

The House of Representatives recently passed the Office of National Drug

Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 2006, which contains language requiring

research into the use of mycoherbicides against drug crops. The U.S. Senate

will consider the House version of the bill and is expected to offer its own

version of the ONDCP Reauthorization Act sometime this spring.

The authors of the mycoherbicide language recommended there be field studies

using mycoherbicides in target countries, such as Colombia and Afghanistan,

where drugs are illegally produced. The bill’s authors also wrongly insinuate

that the use of mycoherbicides against drug crops has not been adequately

studied, which is utterly false. The mycoherbicides developed for use against

drug crops have been studied by several U.S. and foreign government agencies

for the last thirty years in both the laboratory and the field.

During his Congressional testimony before the House International Affairs

Committee on May 11, 2005, White House Drug Czar Walters said:

…“Because

the controversy around mycoherbicides is such that it is likely to create an

environment of – when we already have an effective herbicide [Roundup] –

concern about other agents being introduced to the environment. The Colombian

government has also said that it is not interested [in mycoherbicides]. Again,

it is not clear that this particular organism is specific to coca… If you

were to spray it – and it is not specific to coca – it could cause

considerable damage to the environment, which in Colombia is very delicate. In

order to

start testing this [mycoherbicide] in an open area, it is suggested that one

would be using it… Again, when you spray a foreign substance in areas where

people are farming – in proximity to people and farm animals, you have to be

sure it is safe. And… if you are going to do this in a democratic

environment,

you have to have the people’s confidence that it is safe…â€

In 1998, Senate bill S.2522, the Western Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act,

which authorized $23 million for a three-year “Master Plan for Mycoherbicides

to Control Narcotic Crops†was passed by Congress. A year later, “Plan

Colombia†– counternarcotics and counterinsurgency aid to the Colombian

government − was framed. An integral part of Plan Colombia was that the

Colombians

would use the mycoherbicide Fusarium oxysporum against coca crops.

Governments, the news media and NGOs throughout Latin America balked at the

U.S. plan,

which was passed in August 2000.

Before Plan Colombia passed Congress, mycoherbicides had been the subject of

a June 2000 National Security Council (NSC) meeting. NSC members expressed

concern that the use of mycoherbicides in Colombia could be perceived as U.S.

unilateral entry into biological warfare, and there was fear of setting this

precedent and of possible responses to it. As a result, when President

Clinton signed the Plan Colombia legislation into law, he waived the use of

mycoherbicides there.

“We hope the Senate will thoroughly consider the potentially disastrous

effects of mycoherbicide spraying, and as they draft their version of the bill

that they remove the mycoherbicide language,†Bigwood said. “We urge the

Senate to reject any bill requiring that the U.S. government retest

mycoherbicides

for drug crop elimination, either in the United States or in other

countries.â€

View a copy of the report _here_

(http://www.drugpolicy.org/docUploads/Mycoherbicide06.pdf) .