Do pesticides really deserve government money for an image makeover? California Watch reports that a farm and food industry group is getting $180,000 to “correct the misconception that some fresh produce items contain excessive amounts of pesticide residues.”
That federal grant, funneled through California officials to the Alliance for Food and Farming, has drawn the wrath of the Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based advocacy group.
“This grant is a slap in the face of California’s rapidly advancing organic agriculture sector,” said Ken Cook, president and founder of Environmental Working Group, in a news release. “While conventional produce has seen demand stagnate, organics are enjoying dynamic growth. The state should think twice about using U.S. taxpayers’ money to attempt to give chemical-dependent industrial farming a competitive edge over organics.”
This is just the latest clash between the two industry and environmental groups.
In July, the Alliance for Food and Farming launched a website to combat the Environmental Working Group’s “Shopper’s Guide To Pesticides In Produce.” Better known as the “Dirty Dozen,” it lists produce with the most pesticide residue.
At the time, the industry group said, “The Dirty Dozen list is misleading to consumers because it is based only on exposure data while remaining silent about available information on the toxicity of pesticides present in the diet. Merely detecting a residue does not mean it is unsafe.”
The Alliance’s executive director, Marilyn Dolan, told California Watch that the group intended to “educate consumers about the safety of produce” with its new federal grant for public relations efforts.
“Consumers are not eating enough fruit and vegetables, and part of that may be a fear of pesticides,” she said.
