| < Company Profiles / Scotts |
17.09.03
|
|
Scotts pledges to do our best in order to improve the environment and the communities in which we live and work.81 Quite how this equates to strip mining one of the rarest wildlife habitats in the UK (see Peat Extraction) is not made clear in the report. According to Scotts: Fertilisers pollute waterways, causing algal blooms and deoxygenation of the water. This can result in the death of fish and a marked decrease in biodiversity. Control products destroy biodiversity, cause pollution and pose potential health risks to humans. Scotts aspire to create a world full of lush green lawns, white picket fences and neat flower beds, where irritating pests and weeds (aka biodiversity) are abolished through a combination of fertilisers, pesticides and herbicides. Although the potential consequences for the environment and human health could be devastating, 'Scotts' World' sure will look pretty. Below is a small selection of Scotts' Corporate Crimes
- this is in no way a comprehensive overview of Scotts' wrong doings:
'Streamlining' Health and safety Endangering the public's health Vermiculite In April 2001, 20 years after Scotts told employees it was researching alternatives to vermiculite, the company finally announced plans to phase out the use of vermiculite in its products. The company had known that the product could potentially be contaminated with asbestos since 1971.85 At least five Scotts workers have died and dozens more have become ill due to asbestos fibres that they inhaled while handling vermiculite, which the company used in potting soil and in fertilizers. The company initially denied that the ore caused any health problems but now acknowledges the deaths and illnesses.86 In 1981, two of Scotts' employees attempted to sue Scotts for $5.9 million. Scotts could not be held liable however, since it is covered by the Ohio's Workers' Compensation System which shields companies from lawsuits in exchange for payments into a fund that supports injured workers.87 Despite Scotts learning in 1971 that the vermiculite it was obtaining from W.R. Grace Co.'s mine in Montana was contaminated with asbestos, the company failed to inform its workers until 1976.88 Even then Scotts downplayed the risks. Very small trace amounts of asbestos exist in the vermiculite ore used in our Trionized Process” stated a memo sent to the workers. Ongoing testing by Scotts has shown that the levels of asbestos found in our plant are well within levels which the government has established as acceptable. ”However, information the company submitted to federal and state regulators in the 1970s and '80s showed that workers were exposed to short-term asbestos levels well above 10 fibres per cm3 of air - more than five times the level allowed under Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) regulations at the time.89 Scotts waited a full 10 years, until 1980, to stop accepting
vermiculite from the Montana mine. For the past two decades, the company
has used vermiculite from a mine in Virginia and two in South Carolina.
According to the US Geological Survey, asbestos has been found to
be a contaminant in all three mines. 90
In April 2001, Scotts officials claimed that the company's
sources of vermiculite were asbestos free. However, they later clarified
their definition of the term and said that any asbestos contaminating
the ore was well below regulatory limits. Scotts still denies that
vermiculite poses any health risks. “I don't think it's an issue
of safety, but we have 140 years of trust to manage here, said a company
spokesman, explaining the company's decision to stop using the ore.
“its an issue of perception. And that's sad, because vermiculite
is such a great product.92
Illegally selling pesticides Malathion Benomyl Benomyl is a recognised endocrine disruptor and developmental and reproductive toxicant. Effects associated with benomyl include liver toxicity, developmental toxicity (such as foetal eye and brain malformations and increased mortality), and reproductive (testicular) effects. It is also considered a possible human carcinogen. The chemical achieved notoriety in 2001 when a string of lawsuits were brought against DuPont (which marketed the chemical under the trade name Benlate) by parents whose children were born without eyes, after their mothers were exposed to the fungicide during pregnancy. EPA expects that use of any remaining benomyl products will end in 2003, given that production ceased in 2001, and the sale and distribution of benomyl products will end on December 31, 2002.105 Other Pesticides
According to Environmental Defense, there is insufficient
data available for a safety assessment of all of these chemicals.118
In other words Scotts, having completely failed to adequately assess
their safety, is subjecting millions of people worldwide to a cocktail
of chemicals that are recognised, or suspected, to be harmful. Pollution around the company's Marysville factory Scotts' officials describe the company as “a model environmental citizen”, yet Scotts has an appalling record of pollution around its Marysville factory in Ohio. The Marysville factory was opened in 1957, and from then until the mid-1990s the company dumped fertilisers, herbicides and pesticides that didn't meet quality control criteria into landfills, lagoons and fields surrounding the site.120 The chemicals stored in this way included DDT and chlordane, both known carcinogens suspected of a variety of other toxic effects.121 For details of other chemicals found in the environment around the Scotts plant see: www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts/739294.html . Over the years these toxic chemicals have leached from the landfill sites surrounding the factory, been sprayed onto nearby fields and been spilt or discharged into nearby rivers. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) didn't start investigating the pollution until 1987, when Scotts released 35,000 of wastewater into Crosses Run, a stream that meanders through the company's property. The chemicals killed fish 10 miles downstream in O'Shaughnessy Reservoir, a source of drinking water for the nearby city of Columbus. Scotts was ordered to pay a $35,000 fine, however it took another decade before the company eliminated most of the waste lagoons and dismantled waste treatment plants that had discharged pollution into the stream.122 Another serious pollution incident occurred in 1993, when nitrogen-laden wastewater was sprayed on nearby farm fields, resulting in the death of 1,800 fish. In 1998, a neighbour reported to EPA that the company had been “pulling dead fish from their pond all day”. According to state inspectors, by the time they arrived on the scene, Scotts had already taken 1,000 to 2,000 dead fish to a landfill, making it impossible to determine what had killed them. Water samples collected the same day revealed levels of ammonia and several pesticides dangerous to humans in Crosses Run. The chemicals included dieldrin, endosulphan and heptachlor. The same year, the city of Columbus sent EPA a letter expressing concerns regarding high levels of nitrate and phosphorous contamination in the Scioto River. Water sampling traced the contamination back to the Scotts plant.123 In 2001, following four years of deliberations, the company finally came to agreement with the Ohio EPA, who had initiated an enforcement action against Scotts in 1997 regarding pollution from the site. The company agreed to pay a $275,000 fine and to undertake remediation activities on site.124 The Scotts Company is the world leader in non-agricultural
biotechnology. Through alliances with Sanford Scientific Inc., Rutgers
University and Monsanto, Scotts has exclusive rights to commercialise
transgenic turfgrasses – or “Frankengrass” as Steven
M. Zien, executive director of Biological Urban Garden Services (BUGS)
refers to it.125
Scotts is also attempting to 'improve' flowers and other ornamentals
through transformation.126
Industry officials claim that, if licensed, GM lawn and garden products
could have sales reaching $10 billion annually.127
Dangers of Frankengrass
According to Matt Phillips from Friends of the Earth,
Scotts is “a world leader in peatland degradation”.130
Garden retailers, TV gardening celebrities and even some peat companies have accepted that a peat-free future is “...not only the preferred rout but potentially inevitable.132 However, rather than use its position as the worlds largest garden product company to assist this transition to peat-free gardening, Scotts has chosen to fight it. The company recently relaunched its peat products under the hugely successful Miracle-Gro brand in an attempt to boost sales. Scotts have also been deliberately attempting to mislead the public, since nowhere on the Miracle-Gro packaging does it say that the product is peat based.133 Scotts' agreement with English Nature According to Scotts 'Give Back to Grow' report it has recently: “entered into a ground-breaking agreement with the English government and environmental groups to restore three peat bogs operated by the company to maintain a unique wildlife habitat”. The company also claims to have “won praise for its environmental commitments. The agreement to which the company is referring is one reached with English Nature to halt peat extraction at Thorne and Hatfield Moors in Yorkshire and Wedhome Flow in Cumbria. These are England's largest remaining lowland peatbogs and represent one of the most important wildlife habitats in the UK, being of international conservation importance. The sites were all designated by the UK government as top wildlife sites and parts of them are proposed as Special Areas of Conservation under the EU Habitats Directive. Scotts continued to damage them, in the face of widespread public condemnation, by exploiting legal loopholes that are a hang-over from the end of World War II.134 In response to criticisms of its practices, Scotts' managers and spin doctors released a series of deeply misleading public statements. For example, in the industry journal Horticultural Week, Operations Director at Scott's substrate division, Nick Templeheald, claimed that“we extract from places of no wildlife interest - adjacent to designated SSSIs, but entirely separate from them”. This was despite Scotts' operations on Thorne Moors SSSI, Hatfield Moors SSSI and Wedholme Flow SSSI being within the boundaries of the respective Sites of Special Scientific Interest. The areas were selected by the UK Government's conservation advisers because of their wildlife value, and the designation put them in the top 8% of UK land area in wildlife terms.135 The agreement with English Nature followed a long period of delaying tactics by the company - in order to allow it a “last-ditch mega-grab of peat”136 before it agreed to end extraction. This is not the first time that Scotts has used such tactics and it seems that the corporation is now adept at using delaying tactics to slow down legal proceedings. For example, in 1990 the US government filed a suit against Scotts, seeking a permanent injunction against peat extraction at a site in New Jersey. However, the company's lawyers held the suit in 'administrative suspension' for 12 whole years, and peat extraction did not cease at the site until 2002.137 Under the deal, which was reached in April 2002, following
extreme pressure from environmental groups,138
Scotts agreed to end extraction immediately at Thorne
Moors and Wedholme Flow and to phase out extraction on Hatfield Moors
within the next three years. The deal will cost the British
taxpayer a cool £21.1 million. Despite Scotts being compensated
for a huge loss of earnings at the taxpayers expense, the company
still states it “has access to adequate supplies of growing
media to ensure demand is met for company products for the foreseeable
future”.139
Scotts will continue to extract peat from its other peatbog sites
in the UK such as Carnwath Moss in Scotland, which is a designated
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). With the closure of UK peat mines, the problem may also just be shifted overseas. Imported peat will form a greater proportion of the market, with new bogs being destroyed in Ireland or the Baltic States.142 Faulty products In June 2000 the United States Environmental Protection Agency announced that The Scotts Company would voluntarily recall its Ortho Ready-to-Use Home Defense Indoor and Outdoor Insect Killer after it was reported that the products' containers had a mechanical malfunction that caused exposure to people using them.143 |
|
81
Ibid.
82
Ibid.
83Scotts
(2002) 2002 Financial statements and other information, available
from peg.gordon@scottsco.com
; Scotts Holdings Ltd. (2001) Annual Report for the year ended 30
September 2001, p. 12.
84
Ibid.
85A
century of warnings, The Columbus Dispatch,
17/6/01, www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts/738094.html
, viewed 27/7/03.
86Scotts
beneath the surface: key findings, The Columbus Dispatch,
18/6/01, www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts
, viewed 27/7/03.
87Hawthorne,
M. (2001) Deadly little secret, The Columbus Dispatch,
18/6/01, www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts/738089.html
, viewed 27/7/03.
88A
century of warnings, The Columbus Dispatch,
17/6/01, www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts/738094.html
, viewed 27/7/03.
89Hawthorne,
M. (2001) Deadly little secret, The Columbus Dispatch,
18/6/01, www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts/738089.html
, viewed 27/7/03.
90
Ibid.
91A
century of warnings, The Columbus Dispatch,
17/6/01, www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts/738094.html
, viewed 27/7/03.
92Hawthorne,
M. (2001) Deadly little secret, The Columbus Dispatch,
18/6/01, www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts/738089.html
, viewed 27/7/03.
93New
York State DEC (2003) Ohio Company Fined for Failure to Register
Pesticides, www.dec.state.ny.us/website/environmentdec/2003a/pesticidedec2.htmlPesticide.net
, viewed 23/7/03; Pesticide.net
(2002) Court Cases, www.pestlaw.com/courts
, viewed 23/7/03.
94Scotts
(2003) Ortho Product Guide: Ortho®
Bug-Geta® Plus Snail, Slug & Insect Killer, www.ortho.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=productGuide.productDetails&partnerId=100013&poeSiteId
=10926&strCategoryId=23832&strProductId=101654&dsvs=0449B58E-164B-470B-BAA7-CD5BCE275AAF,x,x , viewed 17/7/03; Scotts (2003) Ortho Product Guide, www.ortho.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=productGuide.productDetails&partnerId=100013&poeSiteId =10926&strCategoryId=23832&strProductId=101787&dsvs=0449B58E-164B-470B-BAA7-CD5BCE275AAF,x,x , viewed 17/7/03. 95Scotts
(2003) Ortho Product Guide: Ortho®
Bug-B-Gon® Garden & Landscape Insect Killer Granules, www.ortho.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=productGuide.productDetails&partnerId=100004&poeSiteId
=10927&strCategoryId=23832&strProductId=105824&dsvs=0449B58E-164B-470B-BAA7-CD5BCE275AAF,x,x , viewed 17/7/03. 96Scotts
(2003) Ortho Product Guide: Ortho®
Bug-B-Gon® Lawn & Soil Insect Killer with Grub Control,
www.ortho.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=productGuide.productDetails&partnerId=100004&poeSiteId=10927&strCategoryId
=23832&strProductId=101789&dsvs=0449B58E-164B-470B-BAA7-CD5BCE275AAF,x,x , viewed 17/7/03. 97APVMA
(2003) Notice: Broadened Scope of Carbaryl Review, Gazette APVMA,
6:35, 3/6/03,
www.apvma.gov.au/gazette/gazette0306p35.shtml
, viewed 17/7/03.
98EPA
(2003) Carbaryl, www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/hlthef/carbaryl.html
, viewed 17/7/03.
99Environmental
Defense (2003) Carbaryl (63-25-2), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=63%2d25%2d2
, viewed 17/7/03.
100Scotts
(2003) Ortho Product Guide: Ortho® Mosquito-B-Gon Tree &
Shrub Spray, www.ortho.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=productGuide.productDetails&partnerId=100013&poeSiteId=10927&strcategoryId=
23832&strProductId=103850&dsvs=0449B58E-164B-470B-BAA7-CD5BCE275AAF,x,x viewed 17/7/03. 101Scotts
(2003) Ortho Product Guide: Ortho® Malathion Plus® Insect
Spray Concentrate, www.ortho.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=productGuide.productDetails&partnerId=100004&poeSiteId
=10927&strCategoryId=23832&strProductId=101685&dsvs=0449B58E-164B-470B-BAA7-CD5BCE275AAF,x,x , viewed 17/7/03. 102Commonwealth
of Australia Gazette, No NRA
3,
4/3/03, www.apvma.gov.au/gazette/gazette0303p19.pdf
, viewed 17/7/03.
103ATSDR
(2001) "Draft for Public Comment" Public Health Statement
for Malathion, www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/phs154.html
, viewed 17/7/03.
104US
EPA (2002) Benomyl; Cancellation Order: Related Material, www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2002/January/Day-15/p958.htm
, viewed 10/9/03.
105Environmental
Defense (2003) Benomyl (17804-35-2), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=17804%2d35%2d2
, viewed 9/9/03; EPA (2003)
Handbook for Non-Cancer Health Effects Valuation, Appendix C: Case
Studies, Economic Valuation of Endocrine Disruption: Introduction,
www.epa.gov/osp/spc/Endoqs.htm
, viewed 9/9/03; US EPA (2001)
Benomyl RED Facts, www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/factsheets/benomyl_fs.htm
, viewed 9/9/03; Corporate Watch (2002) Benlate, DuPont
profile, www.corporatewatch.org.uk/profiles/dupont/dupont4.htm#benlate
, viewed 10/9/03.
106Environmental
Defense (2003) Triforine (26644-46-2), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=26644%2d46%2d2
, viewed 10/9/03.
107Environmental
Defense (2003) Resmethrin (10453-86-8), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=10453%2d86%2d8
, viewed 10/9/03.
108Environmental
Defense (2003) Permithrin (52645-53-1), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=52645%2d53%2d1
, viewed 10/9/03.
109Environmental
Defense (2003) Esfenvalerate (66230-04-4), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=66230%2d04%2d4
, viewed 10/9/03.
110Environmental
Defense (2003) Metacetaldehyde (108-62-3), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=108%2d62%2d3
, viewed 10/9/03.
111Environmental
Defense (2003) Diazinon (333-41-5), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=333%2d41%2d5
, viewed 10/9/03.
112Environmental
Defense (2003) Bifenthrin (82657-04-3), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=82657%2d04%2d3
, viewed 10/9/03.
113Environmental
Defense (2003)Phenothrin (26002-80-2), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=26002%2d80%2d2
, viewed 10/9/03.
114Environmental
Defense (2003) Tetramethrin (7696-12-0), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=7696%2d12%2d0
, viewed 10/9/03.
115Environmental
Defense (2003) Acephate (30560-19-1), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=30560%2d19%2d1
, viewed 10/9/03.
116Environmental
Defense (2003) Fenbutatin Oxide (13356-08-6), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=13356%2d08%2d6
, viewed 10/9/03.
117Environmental
Defense (2003) Propoxur (114-26-1), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=114%2d26%2d1
, viewed 10/9/03.
118
See previous twelve references.
119Scotts
(2002) 2002 Financial statements and other information, available
from peg.gordon@scottsco.com
120Hawthorne,
M. (2001) Toxic legacy, The Columbus Dispatch,
18/6/01, www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts/739284.html
, viewed 27/7/03; Chemical Legacy, The Columbus Dispatch,
18/6/01, www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts/739293.html
, viewed 27/7/03.
121Environmental
Defense (2003) DDT (50-29-3), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=50%2d29%2d3
, viewed 27/7/03; Environmental
Defense (2003) Chlordane (57-74-9), www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=57%2d74%2d9
, viewed 27/7/03.
122Hawthorne,
M. (2001) Toxic legacy, The Columbus Dispatch,
18/6/01, www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts/739284.html
, viewed 27/7/03; Chemical Legacy, The Columbus Dispatch,
18/6/01, www.dispatch.com/news/special/scotts/739293.html
, viewed 27/7/03.
123
Ibid.
124Scotts
(2002) 2002 Financial statements and other information, available
from peg.gordon@scottsco.com
125Zien,
S.M. (2003) Frankengrass, CCOF magazine, Summer 2003, p.
17, http://ccof.org/magazine/grass.pdf , viewed 27/7/03.
126APSNet
(2003) The Scotts Company, www.apsnet.org/directories/sustaindesc.asp
, viewed 11/7/03; Genetix SnowBall
(1998) archive 8.96-97; GE - GMO News 12/14, www.gene.ch/info4action/1998/Dec/msg00039.html
, viewed 22/7/03.
127Zien,
S.M. (2003) Frankengrass, CCOF magazine, Summer 2003, p.
17, http://ccof.org/magazine/grass.pdf , viewed 27/7/03.
128APSNet
(2003) The Scotts Company, www.apsnet.org/directories/sustaindesc.asp
, viewed 11/7/03; Genetix SnowBall
(1998) archive 8.96-97; GE - GMO News 12/14, www.gene.ch/info4action/1998/Dec/msg00039.html
, viewed 22/7/03.
129Zien,
S.M. (2003) Frankengrass, CCOF magazine, Summer 2003, p.
17, http://ccof.org/magazine/grass.pdf , viewed 27/7/03.
130FOE
(1999) Press Release: Stop damaging UK countryside, US company told,
23/2/99, www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/19990223113706.html
, viewed 22/7/03.
131The
Scotts Company – Give back to Grow: A Report To the Community,
available from peg.gordon@scottsco.com
132B
& Q (1998) How Green is my Patio? The Third B & Q Environmental
Report.
133Bennet
, C. (2001) Briefing: US corporation still taking the peat, Friends
of the Earth & Plantlife, www.foe.co.uk/pubsinfo/briefings/html/20010515104308.html
, viewed 12/9/03.
134FOE
(1999) Press Release: Stop destroying UK wildlife sites US company
told, 25/3/99 www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/19990325000115.html
, viewed 22/7/03; Bennet
, C. (2001) Briefing: US corporation still taking the peat, Friends
of the Earth & Plantlife.
135FOE
(1999) Press Release: “Bog Off!” Scotts Told in Peat
Protest: Advisory Notice For Saturday 7th August, 1999,
www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_releases/19990806124931.html
, viewed 22/7/03.
136Bennet
, C. (2001) Briefing: US corporation still taking the peat, Friends
of the Earth & Plantlife, www.foe.co.uk/pubsinfo/briefings/html/20010515104308.html
, viewed 12/9/03
137
Ibid.; Scotts (2002)
SEC form 10Q, 02/12/2002, p. 14 and Scotts
(2002) SEC form 10Q, 05/14/2002, p. 14 – both
available at: www.smgnyse.com/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=SMG&script=1901
, viewed 12/9/03.
138See
www.peatalert.org.uk
139The
Scotts Company (UK) Ltd (2002)Annual Report for the year ended 30
September 2002, available from www.companies-house.gov.uk
.
140Scotts
(2002) 2002 Financial statements and other information, available
from peg.gordon@scottsco.com
141Peat
Alert (2002) A deal was announced today (27th February 2002) between
Scotts and English Nature, to restore major peatbogs as ecological
sites, www.peatalert.org.uk/news270202.htm
, viewed 10/9/03.
142
Ibid.
143MSN
(2003) The Scotts Company Voluntarily Recall Insecticide, 20/6/00,
The Scotts Company: Key Developments,
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/sigdev.asp?Symbol=SMG
, viewed 11/7/03.
|