Save the Frogs - ban atrazine and other frog-toxic pesticides

Friday is Save the Frogs day, with a big rally in Washington DC and an online petition to ban atrazine, a weed-killing pesticide that is very harmful to frogs.

Pesticides are harmful – that’s why they end in “…cide”, like the words genocide and suicide. Pesticides kill things, by design. But, not just the intended targets like weeds or harmful insects. They also can be deadly to non-target or unintended things like frogs, fish, birds, bees, and us. And, by design, they are used in a way that releases them all over our land, water, and food crops. That’s why Congress established special  rules for pesticides, different from other industrial chemicals, requiring that pesticide manufacturers, called ‘registrants’, provide toxicity data up front. And, the law requires, and obligates the EPA to evaluate the data and regulate pesticides with restrictions so that they are used  “without causing any unreasonable adverse effects to human health or the environment”.

Atrazine is one of the most common pesticides in the US, used at about 60-80 million pounds a year in the US, mainly on corn, golf courses and lawns. It has been shown to interfere with male frog gonad development, impair amphibian immunity leading to increased susceptibility to infection, and reduce long-term survival. I’ve covered a lot of that in my earlier blog here.

EPA has assessed a number of pesticides including atrazine for their potential risk to frogs. The results are on EPA’s website here.

EPA found in 2009 that atrazine “is likely to adversely affect” the California Red-legged frog and the Delta smelt – both endangered species.

Atrazine isn’t good for humans either. As detailed in my blog here studies in women it’s been associated with delayed menopause and an increased risk of gestational diabetes. In men its been associated with poor semen quality. And, in EPA has found that it “may play a role in developmental effects” like abdominal wall defects, infant limb abnormalities, and low birth weight.

And, the economics of atrazine don’t add up – if it were cancelled, corn yields wouldn’t be harmed significantly, according to a rigorous economic analysis discussed here.

Although no studies on frogs or even on amphibians are required by EPA, it does require studies of fish (bluegill and trout) and aquatic invertebrates like Daphnia. NRDC has learned that EPA approved pesticides even when the manufacturing companies did not provide fish toxicity tests (for example acequinocyl, boscalid, dimethomorph, dinotefuran, etoxazole,  flazasulfuron, imazamox, metofluthrin, pinoxaden, spinetoram, spinosad, spirodiclofen, spirotetramat, ) or studies on whether the pesticide bioaccumulates in fish (for example, thiacloprid, dimethomorph, fenhexamid,and  fluroxypyr). Without these important fish data, how then is EPA supposed to evaluate potential risks to fish and amphibians? Not very well, I’m thinking.

What can EPA do? Don't approve pesticides until they have been fully tested, and can be used without harming non-target species like frogs, bees, and people. Cancel pesticides like atrazine when the science shows that their use is harmful to frogs and other aquatic amphibians, and likely people also.

What can we do? Avoid pesticides on our lawns, gardens, and around our homes. Talk to our local schools and see if they would consider avoiding pesticides in the school yards where children play. Live with a few weeds and a less-green lawn, in exchange for the happy sound of pesticide-free birds, bees, frogs, and children.

Comments