Vinclozolin had been the subject of numerous studies by an EPA scientist named Earl Gray (luckily it is not used on tea). He found that male rats fed vinclozolin had feminized genitalia with deformities like vaginal pouches, undescended testicles, malformed penises, and shrunken prostate glands.

Disturbingly, these findings were not enough to convince the EPA to stop approving the use of vinclozolin on the foods we eat. The agency not only went about business as usual by continuing to approve existing uses, it also began authorizing new uses as the following story about snap beans shows.

Earthjustice first got involved with vinclozolin when an Oregon farmworkers union learned that workers were spraying this pesticide on snap beans grown in the Willamette Valley in Oregon. These beans were grown for local packaging plants that produced frozen green beans. Historically, the snap beans had been handpicked by workers. But in the 1970s, Oregon growers shifted to bush snap beans that could be machine-harvested. Since the machines can't distinguish between beans with mold and those without mold, the growers began using fungicides to kill the mold. When the beans became resistant to the first generation of pesticides, the growers looked for a more potent solution. Vinclozolin became the pesticide of choice.

To get around the fact that EPA had not yet formally approved the use of vinclozolin on snap beans, the growers claimed that they faced an emergency that required the spraying of vinclozolin. (In a true emergency, EPA can authorize the use of a pesticide that has never been approved). But an emergency is supposed to be just that: an emergency. It's supposed to threaten public health or the viability of a whole crop. And an emergency cannot be declared for more than 3 successive years. By then, the pesticide should either have been approved or rejected.

When Earthjustice looked into this matter, we found that EPA had declared an emergency for 14 years in a row! We decided to take the EPA to court to stop its abuse of power. To head off any threat of a lawsuit, EPA hastily gave its stamp of approval for use of vinclozolin on snap beans. But EPA acted too quickly -- it skipped over the crucial step of determining if the residues of vinclozolin would be safe for consumers.

We went to court again, and unsurprisingly EPA rushed through the second approval process. In a matter of weeks and in response to two Earthjustice lawsuits, EPA had licensed the use of a highly dangerous pesticide on snap beans that families across America would sit down and consume at the dinner table.

Luckily for us, Congress had just enacted a law that adopted more protective food safety standards especially for children. The National Academy of Sciences had called for the higher standards because children's smaller, developing bodies are much more vulnerable to pesticides, and prior safety standards were based on eating patterns and susceptibilities of adult males. EPA's rush job to approve vinclozolin was in direct violation of the new standards, and the agency soon found itself facing off with Earthjustice again.

After many rounds of legal sparring, EPA finally decided in 2001 that vinclozolin was too harmful to be used on our food and began to phase out the pesticide. Raspberries and onion spraying were stopped that year. Kiwis soon followed. And snap bean spraying finally ended in 2005.

This story is proof that when the EPA is not inclined to do the right thing, citizen oversight is key to protecting our food and our families. The chemical companies and grower trade groups had EPA's ear and the agency repeatedly bent to their will. But the tenacious work of Earthjustice attorneys forced EPA to put the health of our children and families first. With vinclozolin finally banned, we can all let out a collective sigh of relief.

A little side note: All the attorneys involved with they vinclozolin case were female while our judge was male. When we realized our papers contained fairly graphic descriptions about the feminizing effects of vinclozolin such as malformed penises and undescended testicles, we decided to have one of the male attorneys in our office read them to see if we had found the right level of detail and tone. As he squirmed in his chair and started to make faces, we knew the evidence was going to get the judge's attention...

Unfortunately, few farmworkers have access to adequate health care in a profession where contact with dangerous pesticides is practically unavoidable. Study after study has shown that pesticides can wreak havoc on the health of farmworkers. Acute poisoning can lead to vomiting, nausea, seizures, paralysis, and even death. Chronic poisoning can lead to cancer, birth defects, disruptions to the reproductive system—the list goes on and on. And it's not just the farmworkers themselves who are at risk. Pesticides on skin and clothing can be brought back to their families, while drift and residue from spraying can find their way into nearby homes, schools, hospitals, and parks.

Earthjustice first started working on farmworker safety more than two decades ago, and the results have been encouraging. One of our biggest victories came in the fall of 2002 when the Washington State Supreme Court ruled that farmworkers who handle the most toxic pesticides must be tested periodically for pesticide exposure. We were thrilled with the ruling -- as were the farmworkers. Medical monitoring would not only help track when unsafe practices are taking place, it would also identify workers who are at risk of falling seriously ill and keep them away from the pesticides.

Following the court's strongly worded ruling, the state of Washington invited farmworkers, growers, and health care professionals to come together and draft a plan of action. In the end, Washington State ended up adopting some of the country's toughest monitoring to protect its farmworkers. They would not only be regularly tested for poisoning, they would also be granted the right to decline work that involved further exposure and be able to maintain pay and seniority. And to prevent unscrupulous employers from retaliating against workers, they would be assured doctor-patient privacy during testing.

This is not to say that everything is now fine for our nation's farmworkers. They still toil under harsh labor conditions and their wages are abysmally low. But at least we are making progress in protecting their basic right to a safe work environment. In the end, it's these small but incremental steps that make our work meaningful. There's even evidence that investigations of workplaces with high exposures have led some farms to stop using toxic pesticides or shift to organic farming. Now that’s getting back to farming the way that it used to be.

But salmon have had a rough century. Once numbering in the millions with numerous species spawning in different seasons, salmon populations are now dwindling. The highest profile culprits are the huge hydroelectric dams that prevent salmon from reaching their historic spawning grounds along the mighty Columbia, Snake, Klamath, and Sacramento rivers. But agriculture has also played a role in the salmon's decline, sucking up water for irrigation and spitting a host of pesticides into the waterways of salmon country.

Earthjustice and our clients have been the driving forces behind protection of wild salmon ever since we helped put the first salmon on the Endangered Species List in 1989. And they still need our help. Pesticides can not only kill salmon outright, they also cause abnormal development, impair swimming ability, injure sense of smell, and reduce growth rates. EPA never really did its job protecting salmon from pesticide exposure and that not only put the fish at risk, it also threatened the livelihoods of fishing communities. Together with fishermen and other conservation groups, Earthjustice sued the EPA for allowing more than 50 hazardous pesticides to be used along rivers and streams without first assuring they wouldn’t harm salmon. We won that case because of two simple facts: EPA's own documents admitted that these pesticides posed a big risk to the beleaguered fish and federal monitoring detected these poisons in salmon streams at alarming levels.

Our victory sent the EPA back to the drawing board to consult with fish experts at the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) while interim fish protections were set up. These included buffer zones along salmon streams where 38 specific pesticides could not be sprayed and warning labels on store-bought pesticides about their risks to salmon. Logical enough compromise, you might think, but it still made the pesticide industry furious. They appealed the case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and lost. They petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, and their case was rejected. They lobbied the Bush administration and Congress to exempt pesticides from the Endangered Species Act, and those efforts failed. Truth is, salmon and pesticides don't mix, and everyone but these industries seemed to know it.

But the story was not over yet. Though EPA finally began to consult with scientists at NMFS, it was now NMFS's turn to drag its feet. For years, NMFS failed to release reports examining the impacts of pesticides on salmon, and it failed to propose ways to stop the chemicals from contaminating the water in the first place. Needless to say, we were not happy with their behavior. Fishing communities were depending on us, as was the very survival of our fish. The only option was to march right back into court.

As always, our diligence paid off. NMFS agreed to settle the case, promising to study the impacts of commonly used pesticides on salmon and agreeing to design permanent measures to help minimize pesticide exposures. The settlement has already produced promising results: in the summer of 2008, NMFS found that 3 pesticides were threatening salmon survival. What the agency will do with that data remains to be seen, but we're feeling hopeful (while staying realistically vigilant).

Earthjustice's court victory over pesticides and salmon says a lot about us. It says that we care deeply about this amazing piece of Pacific Northwest identity. It says that we use smart, forward-thinking lawsuits to ensure government agencies do their job to protect the environment. And it says that we realize it's not just about the fish -- it's about fishermen, it's about communities, and it's about families who want salmon to continue as a part of our heritage.