Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Chameleons Montessori Policy regarding vineyard spraying

On the DVD made of the talk and Q&A session with Prof. London at the Chameleons School recently ( 25 May 2010) the principal, Emma Medell, details the school's policy with regard to protecting the children from chemical spray drift. This can be heard at 35:30 into the film.

The following is a word for word transcription.

"Just for the record, I don't know if everybody is aware of what our policy is in the school, that if there is vine spraying the children don't go outside to play.

They are kept indoors while the spraying is going on and then for 2 hours afterwards. There have been criticisms about how healthy it is in the middle of the summer for the children to be kept indoors. The windows are open for some fresh, for some air. They are not all wide open but there are windows open so there is some fresh air.

So that's kind of where it stands so they are protected by the building at that stage and for 2 hours thereafter."

(there's some other comment form other people at this point but it's difficult to hear exactly as there's too much mumbling) and then Emma continues...

"and spraying down outside after, the hosing down afterwards outside."


I'm pretty certain anyone reading this "official policy" will be immediately struck by the absurd contradiction it displays. The children are kept indoors to protect them from the chemical spray but some of the windows are open to allow in fresh air!

This is so ridiculous it would be funny were it not so indicative of the completely inadequate understanding of reality of the problem on the part of the school. An 8 year old can see the flaw of this the pretence of "protecting the children", mine immediately did when I explained it to him.

We're told the children are kept in while there's spraying going on and for 2 hours afterwards. No particular proximity is given but I would suggest that any time there is active spraying being conducted on the farm it would be appropriate to take some sort of effective protective action.

We now know that, despite the continued misapprehension among many parents that it's only 6 days a year, spraying takes place on at least 10 dates, as indicated on the last spray schedule we were given. Each of those dates indicates spaying activity that lasts anywhere from 2 to 3 days. Mr Veller, the owner of Nitida, has further confirmed, that typically, the spraying lasts from 7am until 5:30 pm each day.

If you compare the actual reality of spray activity on the farm and the school's policy of keeping the children indoors you will clearly recognise yet another apparent contradiction. How, exactly are the children kept indoors for 2 hours after the spraying when the spraying only finishes after the school day ends? and in addition, is already under way an hour before school even starts in the morning?

In my view this "policy" is nothing more than a pretence to suggest something is being done because, clearly, it is practically irrelevant.

As for hosing down afterwards; I don't know anyone who can confirm that they've actually ever seen evidence of this at all. Remember, we're talking about completely wet grounds when you collect your children, for 3 days at a time about every 2 weeks, during the summer. I think we'd have noticed...don't you? I assume they would have needed to wash all the windows each day too. It all hardly seems possible.

Neither can we imagine exactly how this "decontamination" would be carried out in such a way as to ensure the bulk of the spray residue has been effectively washed away. In fact, Prof. London, during his talk, suggested that water probably isn't the solution. I don't suppose he intended the pun.

If this farce isn't enough to convince you of the inadequacy of the schools response to the problem consider the following.

Right outside the schoolrooms is the swimming pool. This open body of water is completely exposed to the air, and whatever is in it, every day of the year. It serves as a perfect catchment area for every single chemical compound that may drift over the premises. There is no natural drainage, the water isn't replaced, merely topped up. I imagine the various compounds will gradually accumulate in the pool water, braking down to perhaps reform into any number of unknown, new compounds and be further complimented by the pool chemicals. Given the size of these chemical particles I think it reasonable to assume the pool's filtration unit will not be sufficiently fine nor sophisticated enough to keep the water free of these contaminants. Swimming pool filters are designed to remove solid matter not chemical residues.

Once a week for about 30 minutes or more, during summer, our children are routinely dipped for into this soup of completely unknown chemicals. You'll no doubt remember that the most common route for pesticide absorption is through the skin so by placing our semi-naked children in this water we maximise the potential for exposure. It's also likely the children swallow some of this water and eyes, ears and noses would obviously be quite sensitive to any potential irritants present.

I doubt that any scientific or medical research ethics council would allow such an obviously hazardous "experiment" to be be conducted. Yet at Chameleons Montessori the clear potential for very real harm to our children was simply not recognised.

1 comment:

  1. So they bring the children inside during the spraying? Well is that not an admission that they are exposed to spray drift - hence bringing them inside ? And then they let them out 2 hours later ? Thats crazy as many of the agrochemicals remain active for days and weeks, if not months!!

    They seem very vague and confused. How do they expect the children to then breathe fresh air inside the classroom whilst there is spraying going on outside ? Do they honestly think that the classrooms are totally sealed so that the kids wont breathe in pesticide laden air ? How can they be so stupid ??

    ReplyDelete